I was genuinely surprised by the Starmer regime’s refusal to state that the Israeli boarding of the Global Sumud flotilla on the High Seas was illegal. I did not realise it was because the UK was planning to undertake similar illegal seizure itself.
The Gaza Flotilla seizure was illegal: while for obvious reasons freedom of navigation had been the undisputed basis of UK maritime policy for centuries. The UK is a set of islands whose population is dependent on food imports to stay alive. Freedom of navigation is a core strategic interest of the UK. The relevant provisions of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea were very heavily UK driven, including on passage through straits.
Abandoning the primacy of freedom of navigation is absolutely a radical policy departure for the UK – driven, like so many other changes to traditional British legal positions, by the Starmer regime’s extreme support for Israel.
It is not generally understood how profound a change this is. Even the Tory government of David Cameron, with William Hague as Foreign Secretary, had opposed the Israeli naval blockade of Gaza and particularly Israeli seizure of vessels on the High Seas. William Hague stated in 2010 to the House of Commons of the boarding of the Mavi Marmara:
We are seriously concerned about the seizure of British nationals in international waters,
This is a long-term British legal position now directly repudiated by Starmer, Lammy and Cooper.
I had not realised that not only was the UK now supporting the campaigns of illegal blockade and seizure of vessels being openly pursued by Israel and by Trump, but Starmer was actually intending to abandon freedom of navigation and join the Trump/Netanyahu doctrine.
That is what the UK has now done by its seizure of the Smyrtos as it had passed through the Straits of Dover en route to Sikka in India.
The Dover Strait is a strait. The clue is in the name. The UK has absolutely no right to close it to Russian shipping. This is in Article 39 of the UN Convention of the Law of the Sea:
Transit of international straits “shall not be impeded” is pretty plain. This is the applicable legal regime for both the Strait of Dover and the Strait of Hormuz. Obviously in time of war different considerations apply, and commercial shipping of belligerent states – and to and from belligerent states – becomes a legitimate target. Iran is fully justified in also treating states permitting attacks launched from their territory as belligerent states.
If hostilities end, this Article 39 regime should apply again in the Strait of Hormuz.
It is worth a footnote to say that Iran had, until the recent illegal aggression by Israel and the United States, always strictly observed the international law on straits even though Iran did not sign the Convention and actually had entered a formal reservation on passage through straits. Even during the war, Iran had attempted, in extremely difficult circumstances, to establish a system for passage of genuinely neutral vessels.
It is astonishing that at this moment, when navigation of the Strait of Hormuz is arguably the single most live question in all of international politics, the UK has decided to abandon the principle of free transit through straits.
It takes hypocrisy to an entire new level – it truly beggars belief – that the day after closing the Dover Strait to Russian shipping, Starmer issued a joint statement with Germany, France and Italy insisting on “Freedom of Navigation” in the strait of Hormuz.
Even if you don’t care about international law and believe that Trumpian realpolitik is better, to act against freedom of navigation now would seem an unwise decision. The UK is now copying actions like the United States naval blockades of Cuba and Venezuela, and the Israeli genocidal blockade of Gaza. These are gross violations of the Law of the Sea.
UK Government minister Lisa Nandy was on television news last night as the government pumped out militaristic propaganda. The Royal Navy’s action in boarding and capturing an entirely unarmed and peaceful merchant vessel was portrayed as an act of Nelsonian brilliance. Nandy justified the seizure on the grounds that Russia’s oil sales pay for its war with Ukraine, and that the UK was enforcing sanctions against Russia.
Neither provides an atom of legal justification for seizing the vessel. The UK is not at war with Russia. Ukraine is, and the Ukrainian navy would have been entitled to seize the vessel. For reasons of cheap popularity and to increase the massive amounts of public money swirling around the corruption honeypot of military spending, UK ministers seem determined to move us to the brink of war with Russia. But we are still not at war, and the UK accordingly has no right to seize peaceful and innocent Russian bound, owned or flagged commercial vessels.
The UK is legally entitled to put whatever sanctions it wishes on Russia. But it can only enforce those within its legitimate jurisdiction. A foreign vessel, even when engaged in innocent passage or transit passage through a UK strait or other territorial waters, is not under UK jurisdiction. The Smyrtos was in fact in international waters south of the UK when seized.
In fact this attempt to enforce Western sanctions in areas where Western powers have no jurisdiction is a classic example of the current aggressive resurgence of imperialism, where the “rules-based order” – meaning rules imposed by the imperialists – replaces international law.
Nandy also stated that the Smyrtos was a member of the “Russian shadow fleet”. This is a term that the Starmer regime and their client mainstream and corporate media have relied upon repeatedly to demonise the Russian owned or directed merchant fleet.
Russia sells oil to countries like India and China perfectly lawfully. That this oil is carried in ships bearing flags other than Russian is perfectly normal.
Nil or close to nil of those ships carrying hydrocarbons to and from the UK are UK registered and flagged.
It has been a sad truth of international shipping for many decades that commercial vessels bear flags of convenience, and that jurisdictions compete to offer the very lowest standards of crew salary and welfare regulations, officer and crew training, vehicle condition, and maritime safety and inspection regimes.
Most of the registries of well-known international flag of convenience states such as Panama, Liberia and the Marshall Islands, do not really exist in the sense of being government departments of those countries, as they should be. They are private companies with almost no real-world footprint, which pay a fee to the government to operate the registry, and collect the fees from the shipowners registering. The register is just names in a laptop – and very often that laptop is in London.
UK colonies often have substantial such fake registries. The UK is a strong opponent of the International Transport Workers Federation, which has struggled against this system to improve mariners’ rights.
The system evolved for wealthy shipowners to avoid all maritime safety, environmental and welfare regulation, and the UK and other Western countries which pander to the needs of the ultra-wealthy have always been complicit. The incredible hypocrisy of Western states pointing fingers at Russia for running “Flags of convenience” is breathtaking.
The West has spent decades building and profiting from the global flags-of-convenience system. Russia is simply using the same system that Western companies created and still dominate.
Incidentally the MOD’s own propaganda footage, shown by all UK mainstream media yesterday, proves that the Smyrtos is a modern, clean, well-equipped and comfortable vessel and all the propaganda about an ancient rustbucket is completely untrue.
I have finally managed to pin down the alleged legal basis of the seizure of the Smyrtos, and it is that the vessel was stateless and thus subject to boarding under Article 110 of the UN Convention of the Law of the Sea.
The UK is claiming that the Smyrtos fell foul of Article 110.1 (d) that it was “without nationality”.
We will inspect that claim more closely in a moment. But, assuming it for a moment to be true, note that you only have a right to visit and inspect on the High Seas a ship that is without nationality. Article 110 absolutely does not confer any right to seize a ship on the High Seas not found on inspection to be in unlawful activity. The UK has seized the Smyrtos, brought it into UK territorial waters and then claimed it is under UK jurisdiction.
Nowhere is that allowed in the Convention.
Now let us look at the claim that the Smyrtos is without nationality. This is an astonishing story which the media will not tell you.
When the Smyrtos set sail from Russia it was flying the Cameroonian flag, and on the Cameroonian register. That is not in doubt.
While the ship was on its voyage, on 10 June Cameroon withdrew its registration. It did so because the EU and UK threatened to halt development aid to Cameroon unless they removed Russian vessels from their shipping register.
So the UK blackmailed Cameroon into deregistering the ship. Then, before the ship could reach a friendly port, the UK boarded it because it had been deregistered.
Now doubtless there are chortling people in the UK security and military industries self-congratulating themselves over how clever they are. But while this may be a clever ruse de guerre, it is hardly a ruse de paix. It is not going to survive scrutiny by an international court. An unexpected change of registration, forced upon the owners, is very difficult to complete instantly, but doubtless one was in train and perhaps finished. The UK actions are patently – and deliberately – unreasonable.
Politicians seek to drum up cheap popularity by stupid jingoism. Starmer has won a cheap headline. The world inches closer to the next world war. The UK loses yet more legitimacy in the eyes of the wider world.
Meantime Trump claims as a great victory a possible return of the Strait of Hormuz to the open status it enjoyed before he started an illegal war in the interests of Israel.
Freedom of navigation was a principle worth defending. It has been abandoned in favour of a return to the rule of the seas by those with the strongest navies. Fortunately Putin is neither as war hungry nor as politically desperate as Starmer. However Russia will now be obliged to send at least a frigate to keep the Strait of Dover open. The drums of war beat ever closer.
Craig Murray is a former Head of Maritime Section of the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office. He is a former Alternate Head of the UK Delegation at the UN Preparatory Commission for the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.
Anybody is welcome to republish and reuse my work, including in translation.
My work has no funding at all except for your subscriptions. If you already, subscribe I would be grateful if you could check if your subscription is still active. Over 80% of my subscriptions lapse when debit or credit cards expire: the systems do not warn you.
Because some people wish an alternative to PayPal, I have set up additional new methods of subscription payment including Patreon account and a Substack account ; if you wish to subscribe that way. The content will be the same as you get on this blog. Substack has the advantage of overcoming social media suppression by emailing you direct every time I post. You can if you wish, subscribe free to Substack and use the email notifications as a trigger to come to this blog and read the articles for free.
I am determined to maintain free access for those who cannot afford a subscription.
Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:
PayPal address for one-off donations: [email protected]
Alternatively by bank transfer or standing order:
Account name
MURRAY CJ
Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
BIC NWBKGB2L
Bank address NatWest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB
Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a
The opening paragraph of Murray’s article characterises the seizure of the Smyrtos as illegal. Not contested. Not legally complex. Illegal, stated as premise, before a single treaty provision is cited, before any analysis appears, so that everything following arrives inside a frame already set, the legal argument functioning not as the derivation of a conclusion but as its confirmation. Not how careful legal analysis is structured. The choice of where to put the conclusion is not an accident of composition. It is the composition.
What the article doesn’t mention is the legal architecture the UK actually cited. Article 110 UNCLOS establishes boarding authority where a vessel is suspected of being stateless. Once statelessness is confirmed, the UK’s stated position is that domestic sanctions legislation, specifically the Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, provides the seizure authority. Two-stage framework. Publicly announced in March, three months before the Smyrtos entered the Channel. Murray’s article runs to considerable length on Article 39 and Article 110 and does not mention it. The Leiden Journal of International Law identifies seizure authority over stateless vessels as an active interpretive dispute. Murray presents it as settled. The difference between a contested interpretive position and a settled legal fact is not a trivial distinction in a piece whose entire argument rests on the reader not noticing it.
What Murray applies throughout is peacetime doctrinal analysis. Article 39, Article 110, freedom of navigation as clean absolute provisions, apparently sealed off from the fact that the vessel’s beneficial owner is at war with a country the UK is actively arming, that the cargo funds approximately 30 to 35 percent of Russia’s federal budget, that Poland is laying 700 kilometres of fortifications along its border with Russia and spending 4.7 percent of GDP on defence, the highest proportion in NATO, that the Baltic states have committed to 5 percent, that Lithuania is training children to operate drones. Countries that have looked at what is happening to their neighbour and drawn a conclusion Murray’s framework requires the reader to set aside. He does not acknowledge that this is what he is asking. He just asks it.
The Hormuz parallel carries most of the article’s rhetorical weight. Scholarly consensus supports that Dover and Hormuz fall under the same Article 39 transit passage regime, which means Starmer’s joint statement defending Hormuz navigation, issued the day after the Dover seizure, does present a consistency problem. Strong point. What it requires, to function as more than a political observation, is that the factual circumstances in both straits are sufficiently parallel for the legal equivalence to hold. Hormuz involves an active conflict zone and a state that formally reserved its position on straits passage and did not sign UNCLOS. The Dover seizure involved a stateless vessel carrying sanctioned cargo under a flag already withdrawn by its registry state. Murray’s equivalence depends on these distinctions not mattering. He does not argue that they don’t matter. He proceeds as though they don’t exist.
One argument holds: the precedent is available to everyone. If the UK can manufacture statelessness through diplomatic pressure and seize on that basis, other states can construct analogous justifications. Independent legal analysis has flagged this. It is the argument most likely to give a sceptical reader genuine pause, the one that doesn’t depend on suppressing context or presenting contested doctrine as settled law. Murray gives it two sentences and a joke about Russian frigates before moving to world war escalation rhetoric. He knew where his strongest ground was.
The sequencing tells you what the article is. Illegal seizure in paragraph one. Legal analysis following behind. Cameroon deregistration becomes blackmail. Enforcement action becomes imperialism. World inches toward war. Each escalation landing before the evidence supposed to support it, the emotional architecture carrying weight the legal analysis cannot, the conclusion always already arrived at before the argument sets out. A structure a careful analyst would recognise. And avoid.
One more thing worth knowing about the man whose legal analysis you have just read.
Murray has appeared on Russia Today 121 times. Press TV, Iran’s state broadcaster, 52 times. Last year he flew to Tehran to judge a state media festival, where he sat alongside a figure under US sanctions for supplying Iranian drones used to kill Ukrainians, told the festival website that Iran was a beautiful country misrepresented by Western media, and posed for the photographs. Weeks before writing this article he appeared on Al Jazeera to argue freedom of navigation on behalf of Iran in the Strait of Hormuz. The same legal argument. The same framework. A different client.
He makes no apologies. He has said so himself. Telling the truth is what matters, irrespective of platform. That is his position and he is welcome to it.
What is also his position, across 173 appearances on Russian and Iranian state media, is a consistent analytical habit: the West illegal, the enforcement aberrant, the legal framework violated, the context irrelevant. The cargo doesn’t matter. Ukraine doesn’t matter. The people under the drones don’t matter. What matters is the transit passage provisions of UNCLOS and the hypocrisy of Keir Starmer.
The outlets that keep inviting him back know exactly what they are buying. A British accent. A diplomatic title he wears like a coat he was asked to return. A veneer of legal authority over a conclusion that was, of course, always going to be the same conclusion…irrespective of the facts, irrespective of the platform, irrespective of who is sitting next to him at the festival.
Craig’s readers deserve to know all of that too, even if they are somehow unable to see it for themselves. You’re welcome.
Craig is a well known leftie. I’m not surprised to learn that he visited Russia and Iran, spoke to them sympathetically and was treated accordingly. George Galloway as I understand has done this sort of thing, and in fact lives in Russia now. Good luck to him.
Maybe people like Craig can be useful as diplomats. 🤣
So am I, M.J. So am I.
The only way to learn anything about either Russia or Iran is to visit them. The impressions of them created by our MSM are, frankly, bollocks.
It doesn’t matter what your political stance is.
“It doesn’t matter what your political stance is.” This reminds me of Donald Trump in 2016: “I will absolutely accept the result of the election, if I win!”
In Iran you had better have a political stance obviously sympathetic to the government, unless you fancy the accommodation of minus 5 star Hotel Evin. Ask the Foremans or Mrs Zagharri-Ratcliffe.
As for Russia, that reminds me of a joke with a retort to a claim of freedom of speech in America: “In our country we can also abuse the American President!” I’m sure Messrs Snowden and Galloway are careful what they say about Comrade Putin.
Only if we presume, for no reason, that the Foremans or Mrs Zagharri-Ratcliffe are innocent. That’s the way the British intelligence services work: use deniable spies, and then make a fuss and pretence of innocence when they’re caught.
Such a poor troll comment, nothing about what is being said just a personal attack based upon stupidity.
“he visited Russia and Iran, spoke to them sympathetically and was treated accordingly.”
Doh !! Isn’t that how civilised people are supposed to act ?
I guess the trolls would prefer an invitation, followed by an assassination, a la USrael. What twats …
Retraction: Alan Argent (June 16, 2026 at 18:17) didn’t say that Craig had actually visited Russia, only appeared on Russian channels. Clearly, I jumped to conclusions, and I apologise.
Please remove my post of June 16, 2026 at 18:34, and this one if necessary.
” The Leiden Journal of International Law identifies seizure authority over stateless vessels as an active interpretive dispute.”
So you basically saying the Britts seized the tanker because they could? Fair point. But keep in mind that Putin also can do lots of things.
The whole set of politics toward Russia played by the American deep state and their friends in Europe since 1991 is based on the assumption that while Russia has the ability to nuke ’em, it has no guts to do this. Putin may prove this assumption to be wrong even without using nukes. Suppose, next time some HMS is sunk, then what? You guys declare war on Russia and cry Article 5? Go ahead, but Trump is not a deep state president and he won’t let Americans die for your sorry asses. And without the US, even with a little help from Estonia and Finland, you are nothing.
They’ll cut the ship lose without any fanfare. We’ve seen this stupid script play out before, whenever the regime needs a distraction from home events or a big Ukrainian defeat.
As for the war points, it’s NATO that’s lacked the means or guts to go for it, 2022 was their best chance. They won’t get another all the rearmament talk is guff.
Who could they invite on that could convince them Britain is a good actor in the world?
I can’t think of anybody.
Alan Argent
Not Seafaring Cove myself but, that was a rather windy way of calling Craig Murray a Putin and Iranian puppet.
Not a specialist on ‘ International ( meaning NATO applied ) Law neither.
‘ Shadow fleets ‘ another phrase unheard of before.
If you are not careful you may find yourself saying that because Israel and the US are Democracies they can bomb the crap out of countries who aren’t or maybe aren’t with no comebacks?
‘ International Law ‘ usually means UN Laws that all signatories should obey.
It’s not selective and just written to include Democracies.
Anyway it is not looking good for the Chosen Few Democracies from where I’m sitting.
Expert or no expert.
It’s all on telly though which helps to see what The ‘ International ‘ Lawists are up to.
Even to less than a layman in Law and War.
“‘ Shadow fleets ‘ another phrase unheard of before.”
It just means “not insured by Western insurers”, although why the whole world should insure through them, or anyone for that matter, is another mystery. It’s a useful shibboleth, though, as the use of it shows the user to be an apologist for the Globalists.
“Once statelessness is confirmed, the UK’s stated position is that domestic sanctions legislation, specifically the Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, provides the seizure authority. ”
The UK can pass what laws it likes. That doesn’t make them part of international law like UNCLOS is. Craig’s point, which you haven’t rebutted, is that there was no basis in international law for the seizure of the vessel.
Clearly GCHQ has started paying its subbies a little more, been a while since I’ve seen a concern troll expend so much energy! You’ve certainly done an extrordinary amount of homework, I’ll give you that, especially if we’re supposedly operating at the level of interested private citizens here below the line.
The unfortunate problem is that your analysis amounts to a word salad. A well prepared salad, but salad none the less:
“Hormuz involves an active conflict zone and a state that formally reserved its position on straits passage and did not sign UNCLOS. The Dover seizure involved a stateless vessel carrying sanctioned cargo under a flag already withdrawn by its registry state. Murray’s equivalence depends on these distinctions not mattering. He does not argue that they don’t matter. He proceeds as though they don’t exist.”
Thats some impressive projection man, given that this is essentially the actual fulcrum of your whole post. It requires a breath taking level of hypocrisy to argue with a straight face that the UK’s actions are legally sound but Iran has been ‘reckless’ with its Hormuz activities, as UK government is fond of saying. Your argument proceeds as though the political engineering of the ship’s deregistration is an irrelevant anecdote beyond the possibility of it setting an international relations precedent. Given the lack of an obvious enforcement mechanism for International law, you’re just advancing a poor moral apology for the UK’s aggressively escalatory behaviour, not any kind of legal argument.
“What is also his position, across 173 appearances on Russian and Iranian state media, is a consistent analytical habit: the West illegal, the enforcement aberrant, the legal framework violated, the context irrelevant. The cargo doesn’t matter. Ukraine doesn’t matter. The people under the drones don’t matter.”
Again, this paragraph is doing a lot of the heavy lifting in terms of your actual point. Readers should feel free to disregard an argument made with solid legal justification because… Ukraine matters? The people of Britain should feel unperturbed if more Russian frigates turn up in the channel as a result of UK government’s escalatory actions because “the UK’s stated position is that domestic sanctions legislation, specifically the Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, provides the seizure authority.”
Gotcha, thanks for clearing that up for us Alan.
Concerning the Smyrtos, whether you view Sir Keir Starmer as a pirate, as with Sir Francis Drake, may depend which side you’re on.
As I understand, Russia had been flexing its muscles in the waters off the UK, and the seizure of the Smyrtos was intended to send a signal. It worked, because such ships are now being diverted into the Atlantic.
Zelensky also thanked the UK for its aid, so we must have done something right, in the world-wide fight for democracy against dictatorship. As a good historical example, I am currently listening to the 50s American radio series I was a Communist for the FBI starring Dana Andrews. There’s plenty to listen to, over 70 exciting episodes. A 1951 motion picture of the same title was made as well (starring Frank Lovejoy). All available on the internet in various places.
Слава Україні!
They’re ALL pirates, or as an old friend of mine used to call them… the Cosmic Mafia, as in gangsters and organised crime. I think the vast majority of people who follow Craig (Jonathan Cook, Caitlin Johnstone etc, etc, etc) are on the side of peace and freedom and equality etc, etc, etc.
Just came across this, posted on June 11th:
CND calls for new direction as defence secretary resigns amid military spending row
Healey’s resignation comes amid arguments between the Ministry of Defence and the Treasury over the long-awaited Defence Investment Plan – a multi-billion hike to military spending that would be funded by deep cuts to public services, including new hospital building programmes, transport and climate action.
Healey and top military officials have been calling for a minimum hike of £18 billion over the next four years, with the MoD claiming it had a £28 billion shortfall in its current spending plans. Amongst the weapons programmes they want to fund are 12 nuclear-capable F-35A fighter jets from the US, that launch US nuclear bombs.
Healey’s resignation letter makes clear he thinks increasing military spending will keep us safe….
https://cnduk.org/cnd-calls-for-new-direction-as-defence-secretary-resigns-amid-military-spending-row/
So after initiating the Ukraine war by provoking Russia – in which hundreds of thousands have been killed and hundreds of thousands crippled and maimed – we go on endlessly poking the bear. These inhuman beings are really REALLY totally fucking demented and totally fucking evil.
I wasn’t sure how much the scumbags have invested in their proxy war (but I knew it was a hell of a lot), so I just did a search:
United States Aid
Total Aid: Approximately $130.6 billion
Details: This includes military, humanitarian, and economic assistance.
United Kingdom Aid
Total Aid: Approximately £21.8 billion (around $28 billion)
Breakdown:
Military Support: £13 billion
Non-Military Support: Up to £5.3 billion
Export Finance: £3.5 billion
European Countries
Total Aid: Approximately $201.7 billion
Details: This figure includes contributions from EU institutions and bilateral support from individual countries.
Yep, the Nazi shitheads are intent on defeating Russia THIS time! And stealing its wealth and resources.
Dear old CND, supports Iran’s right to a peaceful nuclear programme but is vehemently opposed to the UK having one.
“Dear old CND, supports Iran’s right to a peaceful nuclear programme but is vehemently opposed to the UK having one.”
I know you never bother to do any research whatsoever, but this is pathetic, even for you. The “D” in “CND” stands for “Disarmament”. The CND is against Britain having nuclear weapons, not nuclear power stations.
CND considers nuclear power intrinsic to nuclear weapons; at least in the west.
https://cnduk.org/campaigns/peace-and-planet/no-nuclear-power/
You were saying something about not doing any research?
The UK defence policy appears to be, just give money to america – no independence, no defence.
Corr. ‘may depend which side you’re on’ -> ‘may depend on which side you support’
“Zelensky also thanked the UK for its aid, so we must have done something right, in the world-wide fight for democracy against dictatorship”
When you have one country which has cancelled elections, is under martial law and has closed down most opposition parties fighting one that has done none of those things, which one is the democracy and which one the dictatorship?
“Слава Україні!”
Sorry, I don’t read Cyrillic. What does that say, “Heil Hitler”?
I note from a BBC report that democratic Ukraine (with a legitimately elected President) is now giving dictatorship Russia (with a leader who sends opposition leaders like Alexei Navalny to prison in the Arctic Circle to die) a taste of its own medicine.
Слава Україні!
“democratic Ukraine (with a legitimately elected President)”
So we have one ruler who is democratically elected and is still mid term and one whose term has expired but refuses to go, who has cancelled elections and who has suppressed opposition parties. Which is the dictator, eh?
“with a leader who sends opposition leaders like Alexei Navalny to prison in the Arctic Circle to die”
Navalny wasn’t an “opposition leader” any more than Screaming Lord Sutch or Bill Boakes were and was just as much threat to the Russian powers that be, i.e. none. He was. unlike them, but like so many “politicians”, a criminal, which is why he ended his days in prison, admittedly a rare fate for a politician, but still one we should be glad to see. As G.K Chesterton put it, “It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged.” He was also quite obviously a US stooge. They even got Hollywood to make a film about him. Why anyone thought any Russians would vote for him after that is a mystery.
The BAFTA-winning documentary film Navalny (before he was sent to his final doom in the Arctic circle) is available on streaming or DVD. On the website Rotten Tomatoes, over 90% of reviews are positive. For his final fate in the Arctic circle we have John Sweeney’s Murder in the Gulag (ISBN 1035422301).
“On the website Rotten Tomatoes, over 90% of reviews are positive.”
It may be a good film, that doesn’t mean it reflects what actually happened. Indeed, the reverse is true, fims tending to be like translations, “when they are beautiful, they are not true and when they are true, they are not beautiful”.
“For his final fate in the Arctic circle we have John Sweeney’s Murder in the Gulag (ISBN 1035422301).”
Anyone can write a book about something: that doesn’t mean that the book is a true story.
Since the Ukraine is doing so well, one might wonder why they need quite so many £Billions of UK taxpayers’ money, together with that of a whole bunch of other countries, whose own public services are badly underfunded?
Far from just defending their poor little selves, they seem to be on the attack.
So – unless we really are in an honest and declared war ourselves – why are we funding this?
I can just imagine how we would react, had Russia been, say, funding Iraqi “insurgants” to the point that Britain’s mainland was being bombed.
“So – unless we really are in an honest and declared war ourselves – why are we funding this?”
Outsourcing – all the rage these days.
Presumably there was great rejoicing in the M.J. household on May 24th this year in celebration of the sixth anniversary of the “legitimately elected” President’s four-year term then?
And then there was this, and it would appear that the zionists are yet AGAIN lying through their nazty rotten teeth:
Legal notice sent to London synagogue hosting Great Israeli Real Estate Event
The London event, set to take place on Sunday, has extensive links to illegal Israeli settlements
A legal notice has been sent to the Edgware United Synagogue over its hosting of the Great Israeli Estate Event on Sunday, Middle East Eye has learned.
On Wednesday, MEE reported details of the upcoming event’s connection to illegal Israeli settlements.
The event’s location has not been announced by organisers, but MEE understands it is set to be held at the Edgware United Synagogue in Edgware in northwest London from midday onwards on Sunday.
A protest is being planned by groups including the Palestinian Youth Movement and the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network at the intersection of Edgware Way and Broadhurst Avenue, near the synagogue, MEE has learned.
The International Centre of Justice for Palestinians (ICJP), a UK-based legal group, sent a letter to the synagogue on Saturday evening to place it “on notice of serious legal and reputational concerns regarding the event”….
https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/legal-notice-sent-london-synagogue-hosting-great-israeli-real-estate-event (MEE June 14th)
Nearly 100 UK MPs and peers urge cancellation of Israeli settlement event
The letter says ‘Great Israeli Real Estate Event’ in London is promoting sale of ‘stolen Palestinian land’
Nearly 100 British MPs and peers have signed a letter calling for an upcoming London event advertising the sale of land in illegal Israeli settlements to be cancelled, warning that it could implicate the UK in international war crimes.
The Great Israeli Real Estate Event is scheduled to be held in London this Sunday, but its location is being kept secret.
Andy McDonald, an MP for Middlesbrough and Thornaby East, published the statement on X on Friday, urging the UK government to prevent the Great Israeli Real Estate Event from taking place.
“The govt has an opportunity to uphold obligations under international law and take action against Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestine,” McDonald wrote.
The letter, sent to Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper, described the event as “firmly embedded in Israel’s project of colonial expansion” as it facilitates the sale of land seized from displaced Palestinians….
London’s Mayor Sadiq Khan has also condemned “any attempt to sell property in the settlements in the West Bank” and expressed “concerns” about the event taking place in the city….
An MEE investigation previously uncovered evidence of the event’s connections to companies involved in illegal settlements.
Prominent politicians, including Green Party leader Zack Polanski and Your Party leader Jeremy Corbyn, have told MEE the event, whose location is being kept secret, should be banned….
https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/british-mps-peers-urge-cancellation-of-israeli-settlement-event (MEE June 13th)
Police arrest 14 at rival protests over Israeli property event in London
About 1,000 people demonstrated for and against show in synagogue promoting sale of property in Israel
Those opposed to the event, which was held in a north-west London synagogue, claimed it was also selling property in land illegally occupied by Israel and was part of an expansionist plan to drive out Palestinians. Organisers denied this was the case.
Police tried to keep rival protesters apart outside the Edgware United synagogue, which is in an area with a significant Jewish population.
Groups that say they speak for the majority of British Jewish opinion say the repeated pro-Palestinian protests amount to intimidation and harassment, especially if held in a Jewish area.
Pro-Palestinian groups deny this and see it as an attempt to silence protest over widely alleged Israeli human rights abuses.
The Metropolitan police commander Adam Slonecki said: “We have liaised with the venue and the community security trust….
“We are mindful that Jewish communities are experiencing heightened fear and concern following two and a half years of sustained protest and, in recent months, a series of arsons and other attacks….”
The Board of Deputies of British Jews said the pro-Palestinian protests were organised on bogus grounds and amounted to intimidation: “The event organisers have publicly refuted claims that the event is marketing real estate over the green line. It is very disappointing that MPs and other public figures have not acknowledged this and instead inflamed tensions through partial and misleading commentary.
“Protesting at a synagogue based on false pretences seems to be little more than an excuse to harass and intimidate members of the Jewish community.”
Before the event groups including Amnesty International had said it should be cancelled, a call supported by about 100 MPs and peers….
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/jun/14/rival-protests-take-place-over-israeli-property-event-in-london (The Guardian June 14th)
Always, ALWAYS the victim!
I grew up in Edgware, and yes, there are many Jewish people live in Edgware, but to describe it as a ‘Jewish area’ is just complete and utter black propaganda bollox. On the side where the main entrance is there’s a council estate (you have to drive or walk through part of it to get to the main entrance), with around 400 properties (which were all families back then), and about a quarter of a mile from that one, there’s another one, with probably a similar number of properties (many have now been bought of course, and probably around 50% of those are now in the private rental sector, as with council properties in general, and increasing at around 10% each decade).
This analysis is priceless, as no one has more experience and knowledge to explain the matter better than Craig.
What is stunning is the lack of response from Putin. Same as his passivity with regard to the Ukraine war, which he could have finished a long time ago… while he hosts fraudsters Witkoff and Kushner in Moscow. I guess Mr. Putin prioritizes a “deal” with Trump, as if that was possible.
At the end of the day Vlad is serving Russian oligarchs, not the Russian people, and the people of Russia, and of Ukraine, and of Europe, and of the US, are paying and will pay the price while dirty oligarchs and their agents do dirty deals, not even in secret, but in public.
It need never have started in the first place if the US/Biden/Nato had agreed to Russia’s proposal that Ukraine never joins Nato. And the reason they didn’t is because they wanted a proxy war with Russia. And they succeeded.
The US would never stand for having Russian bases on its doorstep…. think Cuban Missile Crisis. What most people don’t know is that Khrushchev was responding to Nato having nukes in Turkey right on the border of the USSR, which Kennedy quietly agreed to remove, thus ending the crisis.
The following is from a piece by John Pilger, posted on Feb 17th, 2022:
Setting aside the manoeuvres and cynicism of geopolitics, whomever the players, this historical memory is the driving force behind Russia’s respect-seeking, self-protective security proposals, which were published in Moscow in the week the UN voted 130-2 to outlaw Nazism. They are:
– NATO guarantees that it will not deploy missiles in nations bordering Russia. (They are already in place from Slovenia to Romania, with Poland to follow)
– NATO to stop military and naval exercises in nations and seas bordering Russia.
– Ukraine will not become a member of NATO.
– the West and Russia to sign a binding East-West security pact.
– the landmark treaty between the US and Russia covering intermediate-range nuclear weapons to be restored. (The US abandoned it in 2019)
These amount to a comprehensive draft of a peace plan for all of post-war Europe and ought to be welcomed in the West….
WAR IN EUROPE AND THE RISE OF RAW PROPAGANDA
https://johnpilger.com/2022/02/17/war-in-europe-and-the-rise-of-raw-propaganda/
I knew the answer, but not the details, so I asked the Search Assist, and this was the response (from a wikipedia entry):
Yes, there were indeed plans and discussions among U.S. military officials and policymakers about potentially using nuclear weapons against the Soviet Union shortly after World War II, before the Soviets developed their own nuclear arsenal. Between 1945 and 1949, the Pentagon developed at least nine nuclear war plans targeting the USSR.
And there was this at the top of the list of results that came up:
From 1945-49 the US and UK planned to bomb Russia into the Stone Age
Just weeks after the Second World War was over and with Nazi Germany defeated, Soviet Russia’s allies, the United States and Great Britain, hastened to develop military plans aimed at dismantling the USSR and wiping out its cities with a massive nuclear strike….
https://canadiandimension.com/articles/view/from-1945-49-the-us-and-uk-planned-to-bomb-russia-into-the-stone-age (Canadian Dimension October 2016)
Yerse, it was there way of thanking the USSR for helping to defeat Hitler.
Night-night!
As the article explains the US didn’t have enough bombs nor enough aircraft, the UK didn’t develop it’s own atomic bomb until 1952, so not really a feasible plan.
FFS ! How many NUCLEAR bombs would the US have needed to destroy Russia?
If you bother to read the article they estimated 300 plus another 20,000 tons of conventional bombs. At the time the US had 50 atomic bombs and 32 modified B29s capable of carrying them. The UK had nothing.
Should be pointed out that the B29 was obsolescent and would’ve suffered heavy losses.
“As the article explains the US didn’t have enough bombs nor enough aircraft, the UK didn’t develop it’s own atomic bomb until 1952, so not really a feasible plan.”
So it was fine for the UK to plan to turn on its ally that it had just been fighting alongside because they didn’t actually do it. With friends like that, who needs enemies?
– NATO guarantees that it will not deploy missiles in nations bordering Russia. (They are already in place from Slovenia to Romania, with Poland to follow)
– NATO to stop military and naval exercises in nations and seas bordering Russia.
– Ukraine will not become a member of NATO.
– the West and Russia to sign a binding East-West security pact.
– the landmark treaty between the US and Russia covering intermediate-range nuclear weapons to be restored. (The US abandoned it in 2019)
Any promises from Russia to withdraw missiles and stop exercises close to NATO states?
Any promises from England-As-Britain to end it’s near 200 years long antagonistic martial sniping against Russia? The reason for which is simply Anglo annoyance it has never been able to subjugate Russia and, in more recent times as part of the Coalition Of The Imbeciles, get control of it’s vast resources in order that the West Oligarchy can stuff even more gold down it’s fat throat
So that would be a ‘no’ then….
@ P Migraine. That’ll be a ‘ WTF should they? ‘
“Any promises from Russia to withdraw missiles and stop exercises close to NATO states?”
These could be the subject of negotiations. However, these Putin’s points you’ve quoted above were declared obviously impossible to implement, so your objection is mute.
“Any promises from Russia to withdraw missiles and stop exercises close to NATO states?”
“You can tell that Russia and China are the main threats to world peace: look how close to our bases they have put their countries”
Isn’t that what they did when they removed their nukes from Ukraine or are you seriously suggesting that Russia should refrain from having missiles or exercises within its own borders because that would be too close to members of a hostile alliance? If so you are being even dafter than you normally are.
Ukraine voluntarily gave up the nuclear weapons it inherited in 1994 in return for security guarantees that have proved worthless.
I’m suggesting that if Russia wants its neighbours to withdraw troops and missiles then it should show willingness to reciprocate. Only fair do you not think?
“Ukraine voluntarily gave up the nuclear weapons it inherited in 1994 in return for security guarantees that have proved worthless.”
Ukraine didn’t inherit any nuclear weapons. When Ukraine detached itself from the CIS, it had some of Russia’s nuclear weapons on their soil, which they should have given back, but didn’t, despite being paid to do so.
“I’m suggesting that if Russia wants its neighbours to withdraw troops and missiles then it should show willingness to reciprocate. Only fair do you not think?”
No, because reciprocation would include Russia advancing to match NATO advancement before withdrawing to match NATO withdrawal. Russia had already “withdrawn” it’s equivalent to NATO, the Warsaw Pact, right back to their own borders. NATO did not “reciprocate” then by likewise withdrawing from Germany. On the contrary it advanced towards Russia. In any case there was never a question of NATO withdrawing, only not advancing. (That’s a distinction even you can see, is it not?)
Ukraine and nuclear weapons:-
https://www.nti.org/analysis/articles/ukraine-nuclear-disarmament/
Note the security guarantees.
No, because reciprocation would include Russia advancing to match NATO advancement before withdrawing to match NATO withdrawal.
That’s wrong how? You’re confusing the old Soviet Union with Russia once again. Russia no longer has the luxury of having several unwilling buffer states on its western border.
” At the end of the day Vlad is serving Russian oligarchs, not the Russian people,” is that right? Where is your evidence for that? Are you saying that his desire to avoid WW3 is ” serving Russian oligarchs “? Could it not be the case that he realises that the best way to serve the Russian people is by not plunging them ( and the rest of the world ) into a potentially life on Earth ending nuclear holocaust?
Amazing how so many people seem to think anything short of precipitating full-on global carnage is some kind of cowardice.
We should ALL be grateful there are still rational leaders like Vladimir Putin; Xi around; and not exclusively the collection of catastrophe inciting, totally-divorced-from-Reality psychopaths that comprise the European/NATO * Leadership *.
It a long standing excuse for Russia’s slow progress in Ukraine. They could, so it’s claimed, flatten Kyiv and obliterate Ukraine’s army overnight but Putin is holding his military back.
Yes, exactly; so what is your point again? You, like yr ilk, seem stuck in a perpetual contradictory view of ” Putin ” being both too weak to use the full force of his military and – simultaneously, the greatest threat to ” the Free World ” ( ahahaha fuckn ha ) extant. So which is it, Mr Migraine?
Well if you believe it his ‘holding back’ has prolonged the war in Ukraine and trashing his own economy. Nobody wants any of that.
“Nobody wants any of that.”
Well, luckily for the Russians, the trashing of their economy (to an extent greater than most economies are already trashed) is pretty well entirely a figment of the Western MSM and their disciples.
luckily for the Russians, the trashing of their economy (to an extent greater than most economies are already trashed) is pretty well entirely a figment of the Western MSM
Please tell that to Anton Siluanov, the Russian Finance Minister, and the Russian MSM who I’m sure will find it very reassuring.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXITghyFH7Y
Having the BBC cherry-pick bad news out of the Russian press does not mean that the economy is trashed. A similar exercise could be carried out for any economy in the West, all of which are hardly growing at all whereas Russia’s is now the fourth largest in the world.
Pears Morgaine 10.09am.
I think its more to do with limiting civilian casualties, than actually taking Kiev – the Neo-Nazi regime has no such qualms about limiting civilian casualties – Ukrainian or Russian for that matter.
Yes, RoS, people like Mr Migraine et al have such a warped, Brit propaganda-fed perception of President Putin it’s more-or-less impossible for him/them to even imagine the possibility the one of Russia’s aims in this Proxy War is to limit the casualties ON BOTH SIDES. As you rightly say, not a consideration that the utterly corrupt, Fascist-riddled Zelensky Regime/ Military ever make
Robert Hughes
You just have to look at the amount of young Ukrainian men, who have fled Ukraine they don’t want to fight – the ones that have stayed are constantly on guard – due to marauding gangs of conscriptors who kidnap young men off the street of Ukraine and pressgang them into service – Ukrainians don’t want this war, the Neo-Nazi’s and the West want it, but not the people.
Without Nato troops and weapons, Ukraine would’ve collapsed long ago – Zelensky isn’t even elected – his tenure ran out years ago – he too is trapped in his position, if he pushes for peace the Neo-Nazi brigades will execute him – as would the West, or he might find himself facing war crime charges – if he threatens to reveal all – so the war will go on.
So why bomb civilian targets and the infrastructure needed to keep people alive during the winter?
“So why bomb civilian targets and the infrastructure needed to keep people alive during the winter?”
As someone who condones the deliberate bombing of a civilian passenger train because the railways are part of Russia’s essential military infrastructure, you should already know the answer to that question. Perhaps you can inform us of the number of Ukranian civilians who have frozen to death as a result of the damage to power stations, so we see if it matches the number of civilians unfortunately killed in Ukraine’s remarkably unsuccessful attempts at destroying Russian military installations.
“It a long standing excuse for Russia’s slow progress in Ukraine.”
Not all reasons are excuses, nor vice versa, something you appear to be struggling to comprehend.
“They could, so it’s claimed, flatten Kyiv and obliterate Ukraine’s army overnight”
Perhaps you would like to explain what flattening Kiev would achieve and provide some evidence from someone who isn’t an armchair war hawk that Russia could obliterate the Ukrainian army overnight.
Perhaps you would like to explain what flattening Kiev would achieve
It’s not me making these claims and flattening Kyiv would, as I’ve tried to explain before, achieve nothing but bombing the civilian population into submission is clearly part of Russia’s strategy. Various of Putin’s useful idiots have been calling for Kyiv to be destroyed and there was the threat to foreign nationals, including diplomatic staff, to leave Kyiv made a few weeks ago (none did).
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1e22n55zn4o
“but bombing the civilian population into submission is clearly part of Russia’s strategy. ”
Only to you and your fellow Yankies. It may be the case with the US and the UK, but not everyone follows the American way of death.
“Various of Putin’s useful idiots have been calling for Kyiv to be destroyed”
Pot, meet kettle.
From the start of the invasion on 24 February 2022 until 28 May 2023, the air raid siren has been on in Kyiv for a total 887 hours ( 36 days).
The city endured 1,300 drone and over 250 missiles attacks in 200 airstrikes by Russian forces in 2024. There were 500 air raid alerts throughout said year, resulting in 550 damaged residential buildings, with daily power outage averaging nine hours. In the first three years of the full-scale war, 210 civilians died, among them 11 children.
Strikes continued into 2025, with the overnight airstrike on 3rd July launching a record number of drones and missiles targeting the Kyiv metropolitan area (KMA), breaking the daily record of Russian long-range drones launched across Ukraine since beginning of the invasion.[Further escalations occurred on 8th July, with 728 drones and 11 missiles targeting KMA and ten out of Ukraine’s 23 oblasts.
Overall 16,000 civilian dead have been identified including 800 children; 1,500 schools and as many hospitals and other medical facilities have been destroyed.
“In the first three years of the full-scale war, 210 civilians died, among them 11 children.”
Not terribly good at it, are they? If the Russians’ aim was to kill civilians and they only managed 210 in three years, they need to get some better bomb-aimers. Why, the RAF or the USAF could kill that many German civilians in a single air raid. Don’t you think the Russians might just be aiming at something else?
Don’t you think the Russians might just be aiming at something else?
I think they’re doing their best to destroy civilian morale thus the attacks on power stations and district heating systems every winter. I’m sure if they had the wherewithal to mount 1,000 bomber raids against Kyiv they would do so but it would be futile and they’d lose a lot of aircraft too.
Re Russian response or lack of it.
Maria Zakharova, the Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson follows the line of Craig’s article. “The UK has started openly engaging in piracy against ships for its own benefit and to change global logistics….”
Sergey Savchuk in RIA Novosti adopts a derisory tone using what I have noticed is fairly typical Russian media practice of using British media headlines and articles to reflect their own point of view. Why waste Russian literary energy when the Brits hacks say what you want to say anyway?
“The British Prime Minister announced with pathos that, on his personal orders, a tanker allegedly belonging to Russia’s shadow fleet had been detained in the English Channel. In his fiery speech, Keir Starmer concluded by urging all European allies to do the same to deprive Russia of the funds it needs to wage war against Ukraine. It is unclear what the purpose of this elderly British lion’s spasmodic outburst was, nor is it clear who the intended audience was, but the Prime Minister’s speech was met with a wave of criticism and mockery.
The Spectator magazine, one of the oldest publications in the UK, called the whole thing a theatre and a political stunt. Ordinary commentators competed in a race of caustic jokes, noting the blatant showmanship of the ship’s detention, when a TV cameraman descends on a cable ahead of the capture team and calmly stands with his back to the potential scary Russian oil smugglers, while the paratroopers themselves menacingly move the barrels of their machine guns across the completely empty deck”
He then sticks his own oar in
“Even if we assume that Smytros is indeed involved in the transportation of petroleum products, the cargo on board is not Russian. The oil in the holds belongs to the purchasing country or company, which means that the British Royal Navy is engaged in open robbery, depriving the bona fide party of its property, for which millions of dollars have already been paid. At the time of the seizure, this money has long been deposited in the accounts of Russian oil traders. With equal success, Starmer’s cabinet could have directly purchased fifty to sixty thousand tons of Urals in the port of Ust-Luga or Primorsk, and then claimed that they had deprived the Russian army of fuel”.
I do not know how true this is but it would explain why Russia treats Starmer’s performative and self – defeating actions with the contempt that they deserve.
The US pirates flying corp are ripping up the skies above South Norfolk, zero responsibility to anyone, unaccountable and dangerous.,
So a Russian navy ship fired a salvo across the bow of a yacht – off the coast of the Isle of Wight – apparently the yacht had been given several warnings via flares – loud speaker, and it wouldn’t reply to radio messages sent by the Russian navy ship – that the yacht was on a collision course – so a salvo had to be fired.
This incident has gotten the Corporate Controlled Media’s dander up – whilst the Tories have said they will back Labour in cutting welfare benefits – to increase defence spending.
This come s hot on the heels of the English government pirating a oil tanker in, international waters (English channel) recently – that was carrying Russian oil.
Coincidentce or what ? All reports indicate that the people involved in this incident are assets or complete morons.
Stevie Boy
Morons for me, I saw the yachts sails on the news today – and the main sail is a 20 odd foot Union Jack, who sails with that unless they are in an international yachting race. The rather elderly couple who were on the yacht gave an account (their account that is) of what happened, and it doesn’t match that (In any way) of what the captain of the Russian military ship said, which is not a surprise.
I think maybe there was a bit of goading, and oneupmanship from the couple to noise up the Russian vessel.
Republicofscotland
June 17, 2026 at 15:17
Actually no.
The big sail with the Union Flag is a spinnaker (a downwind sail connected to the boat at the masthead and to the end of the spinnaker pole and finally to a sheet rope).
Spinnakers are generally gaudy in colouring and flags are not uncommon – though in poor taste imo.
Flying a spinnaker two-handed on a 40 ft yacht is not a minor accomplishment. Both sailors knew what they were doing.
The yacht is described in the English press as “engineless”. Not clear whether the engine was faulty or absent.
A relatively large sailing yacht with only two on board that is flying a spinnaker cannot quickly change course.
A fvcking big naval vessel with thousands of hp can.
And generally sailing vessels are stand on vessels over power driven vessels.
The Col Regs don’t say anything about the discharging of weapons by give way vessels.
A yacht crossing the Channel would certainly have an engine. For all the talk of power giving way to sail, yes, on a reservoir or similar in a dinghy, but in the Channel with tankers, container ships, cruise liners, ferries, military ships including aircraft carriers and the like, good luck in insisting they change course at the sight, if they even see you, of your sails. The couple had apparently set off from the south coast at 4 am, and it was close to noon, quite possible the two codgers had fallen asleep at the wheel.
They were under power of their engine, not the sails. ie. They deliberately motored towards a foreign warship. They are morons.
Stevie Boy
June 17, 2026 at 16:42
“They were under power of their engine, not the sails. ie. They deliberately motored towards a foreign warship. They are morons.”
And you know this how?
Maybe drinks had been taken by the yachties….?
Stevie Boy @16.42pm.
“A Russian Navy vessel fired warning shots at a U.K.-registered yacht in the English Channel on Tuesday, the Russian military confirmed, saying the civilian boat was making a “dangerous approach” toward the warship.
The incident was reported midday Tuesday about 20 nautical miles south of the Isle of Wight, outside U.K. territorial waters.
The Russian frigate Admiral Grigorovich detected the U.K. yacht *** “proceeding under engine power***on a dangerous course that would bring it into close proximity with the warship,” the Russian Ministry of Defense said in a statement”
https://abcnews.com/International/russia-confirms-warship-fired-warning-shots-uk-yacht/story?id=133929394
Republicofscotland
June 17, 2026 at 18:38
Well if the Russkiy Armata (sic) says that the yacht was on engine power that’s enough for me.
A few photos would help convince the doubters..
“The yacht is described in the English press as “engineless”. Not clear whether the engine was faulty or absent.”
Anyone who takes an engineless boat across the English Channel is a bloody fool.
“A relatively large sailing yacht with only two on board that is flying a spinnaker cannot quickly change course.”
You obviously know nothing about sailing. A vessel sailing downwind can alter course easily, even if it is being sailed single handed. The spinnaker is irrelevant. The only point of sailing where a sailing vessel is constrained is that if it is already close-hauled, it cannot come any closer to the wind.
Bayard
June 17, 2026 at 20:54
“You obviously know nothing about sailing. A vessel sailing downwind can alter course easily, even if it is being sailed single handed. The spinnaker is irrelevant. The only point of sailing where a sailing vessel is constrained is that if it is already close-hauled, it cannot come any closer to the wind.”
Bayard, we all have particular expertise in particular domains.
At the risk of doxxing myself, I have been sailing since the early 1990’s.
Gybing a spinnaker, short-handed, while menaced by a warship, is not easy.
And this yacht may not – we are told – have had a working engine.
Perhaps you know better?
The two OAPs onboard the yacht say there were no flares and no attempt to contact them by radio. They were under sail so their ability to manoeuvre was limited however after the Russians opened fire they did start up their engine and turn away. Hope that clears things up.
That a heavily-armed 4,000 tonne warship should be so spooked by two pensioners out for a sail suggests that the Russians must be living in a state of near panic.
“Gybing a spinnaker, short-handed, while menaced by a warship, is not easy.”
Who said they had to gybe? A crew of two for a yacht like that is not “short-handed”. If they were incapable of handling a spinnaker between the two of them, they shouldn’t have been flying it.
“Flying a spinnaker two-handed on a 40 ft yacht is not a minor accomplishment.”
Flying a spinnaker two-handed on a 40 ft yacht is a damn sight easier than flying one on a 14ft dinghy, which people do all the time. The yacht is not going to capsize if you get it wrong.
Anyway, you and your mate Piercing Migraine are talking bollocks as usual. From the BBC, who have no incentive to play this down:
Jane Kelvey told BBC Newsnight: “[The warship] gave out five blasts on their horn, which means ‘have you seen us?’ We immediately turned two degrees to port so they could see we had made a deliberate change of course, which meant we had seen them. Then a minute or so later they gave another five blasts on their horn, immediately followed by four to five small arms fire. That wasn’t aimed at us – it was warning fire that went up in the air, we believe.”
After the gunshots they steered the yacht 90 degrees to port using the motor, she said.
FYI I have been sailing since the late 60s.
Bayard
June 18, 2026 at 08:18
Glad to meet another sailor on the forum.
Certainly the reports are vague.
Maybe the yacht wasn’t flying a spinnaker, the photos may be misleading.
However the reaction of the Russian frigate was wildly disproportionate and irresponsible.
Even small arms fire is potentially lethal. What goes up must come down…
A 13 metre unarmed GRP yacht is no conceivable threat to a (?) 100+ metre steel hulled warship.
In peacetime warships have no more stand on rights than other pdv’s under ColRegs.
In wartime they do what they wish and suffer consequences.
“A 13 metre unarmed GRP yacht is no conceivable threat to a (?) 100+ metre steel hulled warship.”
How were the Russians to know it was unarmed? It could have been unmanned and packed with explosives, like the “African Queen”. That would have made a fair sized hole in the warship’s hull. Given that Ukraine is supposed to have used a yacht to blow up Nordstream, the yacht could have been chartered by Ukranian special forces. There has already been one ship, the Ursa Major, sunk by unknown actors, so it was not inconceivable. Also, Jane Kelvey said “We immediately turned two degrees to port so they could see we had made a deliberate change of course, which meant we had seen them. ” The Russians would have had difficulty noticing such a tiny change in direction. A large wave would cause a similar deviation. It was certainly not any definite evidence that the boat had realised it was on a collision course. Possibly the small arms fire was a bit over the top, but, given what had just happened to the Smyrtos,, and given all Starmers inflammatory remarks about Russian shipping, it is not surprising that the Russians were a bit jumpy. They certainly didn’t fire on the yacht, as Starmer said they did.
Hmm, we’re assuming this “yacht” even exists.
It’s not like British regime propaganda is above flat-out making shit up.
I think we can be assured that it exists, but we can also be assured that Der Stürmer and the British press are talking bollocks about it.
Maybe it was as we have been told – but I thought even the way the media wheeled out the couple so quickly, and the rather pat quotes they used, was in itself fishy.
I can’t help but think that had there been no warning and then a collision it would be the yacht and its 2 occupants that would have come off second best.
Serious question: does UNSCLO actually apply to stateless vessels ? It seems pretty clear that they lost their Cameroon registration on May 26th.
For example, under article 90 (freedom of navigation) it states: “Every State, whether coastal or land-locked, has the right to sail ships flying its flag on the high seas.” It is clear from that that the right given is to states and not to stateless vessels. Does a stateless vessel enjoy any protection ?
Hi Alex:
Mr Murray’s article states:
While the ship was on its voyage, on 10 June Cameroon withdrew its registration. It did so because the EU and UK threatened to halt development aid to Cameroon unless they removed Russian vessels from their shipping register.
So the UK blackmailed Cameroon into deregistering the ship. Then, before the ship could reach a friendly port, the UK boarded it because it had been deregistered.
Now doubtless there are chortling people in the UK security and military industries self-congratulating themselves over how clever they are. But while this may be a clever ruse de guerre, it is hardly a ruse de paix. It is not going to survive scrutiny by an international court. An unexpected change of registration, forced upon the owners, is very difficult to complete instantly, but doubtless one was in train and perhaps finished. The UK actions are patently – and deliberately – unreasonable.
Thanks. I am actually able to read the original post.
It still seems that de deregistration (organic or coerced) happened almost 3 weeks before the event. Under such circumstances sailing through the channel stateless was very much asking for trouble.
From where do you get the date of May 26th? Craig gives the date of deregistration as June 10th.
Cameroon ministry of transport
They have posted all sorts of documents to that effect. Seems genuine.
That would explain the lack of response by Russia. The whole thing was a trap into which the British gleefully jumped.
I would have thought that because a vessel is “stateless” it does not give an automatic right for any country to board it on its whim. It only makes an intervention lawful if there are legitimate grounds for doing so. In this case grounds made up by the UK government.
Very well researched and explained. Thank you
Jeffrey Sachs today responded to an open letter by a “Tonio Nielsen” (fake name) criticizing Sachs´s letter to Chancellor Merz from May 28th, in German daily BERLINER ZEITUNG.
Tonio Nielsen:
https://archive.is/uocrL
Sachs today
https://archive.is/1ULHB
See also the Ukraine thread in the forum for this exchange:
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/forums/topic/ukraine-date-nov-2023/page/52/#post-106870
Let me just quote an excerpt regarding one repeated claim, which Sachs was confronted with, namely that Putin was denying Ukraine independence and a right to exist.
As we should all know, the opposite is true:
Sachs:
“(…)
7. On Putin and Ukrainian sovereignty
Mr. Nielsen devotes considerable space to Putin’s argument, which he describes as an “imperial argument against Ukraine’s right to exist as a sovereign nation.” He bases this argument on Putin’s essay “On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians” from July 2021. Here I must state quite clearly: Mr. Nielsen appears not to have read the document he criticizes. Putin’s essay is a detailed historical treatise on the civilizational kinship between Russians and Ukrainians and on how the Soviet Union drew artificial borders. One can agree with this or not. However, the conclusion—the final paragraphs—stands in stark contrast to what Mr. Nielsen claims. In the final lines, Putin writes: “We respect the Ukrainian language and Ukrainian traditions. We respect the Ukrainians’ desire for a free, safe, and prosperous country.” And his concluding sentence: “What Ukraine will be will be decided by its citizens.”
This was a statement in which Russia recognizes Ukraine’s right to self-determination while simultaneously—as Russia has openly and continuously done for thirty years—rejecting Ukraine’s integration into a hostile Western military alliance directly on its border. The conflation of historical arguments with the claim that Putin is striving for imperial conquest is a common tactic in Western polemics, one that Mr. Nielsen deliberately employs. But the text itself speaks for itself. Anyone can read it.
(…)”
p.s. And since Istanbul was a topic here not too long ago. Let me add point 6 from Sachs´s longer piece:
“(…)
6. The Istanbul Peace Agreement of April 2022
What I said:
Just weeks after the Russian invasion in February 2022, Russian and Ukrainian negotiators met in Istanbul to negotiate the terms of a peace agreement: Ukraine’s neutrality outside of NATO, multilateral security guarantees, agreed-upon troop limits, and a gradual political solution to the Donbas and Crimea issues. Former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, one of the mediators, publicly confirmed that an agreement was imminent and that the West was trying to prevent it. Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s mission to Kyiv to instruct Ukraine not to sign the agreement is a matter of record. Hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian and Russian lives paid the price.
Here’s what Mr. Nielsen has to say about it:
Nothing. The word “Istanbul” does not appear in his reply.
Why this silence matters: Mr. Nielsen calls my proposal a “controlled surrender.” However, the Istanbul Conditions—Ukrainian neutrality, multilateral guarantees, and a political settlement of the disputes—were precisely the conditions that Ukrainian negotiators themselves put on the table in April 2022, after eight weeks of war. It was not a “surrender,” but a negotiated agreement on terms that largely corresponded to what most realistic observers expected to be the end of this war after several more years of bloodshed and potentially hundreds of thousands more deaths. Mr. Nielsen doesn’t address this. He doesn’t challenge Bennett’s statement. He doesn’t question Johnson’s mission. He simply ignores this disastrous diplomatic failure.
(…)”
This was a statement in which Russia recognizes Ukraine’s right to self-determination while simultaneously—as Russia has openly and continuously done for thirty years—rejecting Ukraine’s integration into a hostile Western military alliance directly on its border.
Sachs being his usual disingenuous self. The contradiction in that sentence is clear for anyone to see. If Putin does recognise Ukraine’s right to self-determination why the effort to steer it away from the EU and the invasion which was/is intended to disarm the country and replace the current government with one favourable to Russia?
A draft treaty was never completed in Istanbul. What was on the table would’ve effectively disarmed Ukraine and left it at the mercy of Russia as its ‘security guarantor’, a bit like handing over the keys to your house to a man who has just burgled it. Russia was also demanding to keep all the territory it had occupied which was unacceptable to Ukraine.
https://understandingwar.org/research/russia-ukraine/fact-sheet-istanbul-protocol-draft-document-of-april-15-2022/
“If Putin does recognise Ukraine’s right to self-determination why the effort to steer it away from the EU and the invasion which was/is intended to disarm the country and replace the current government with one favourable to Russia?”
Perhaps Ukraine’s present government was the outcome of an effort by the EU and NATO countries to steer Ukraine away from Russia and so does not represent the will of a majority of its people, particularly in those areas where people would see themselves as Russian, partly as a result of the present governments attempt impose language and other restrictions upon those people.
Ukraine’s current government is the outcome of free and fair elections held in 2019.
Elections in which the people of Donbass were not able to participate! So neither free nor fair in other words.
John A, an election is “free and fair” when it return the “right result”, when “someone we like can get elected”, as Tom Lehrer put it. All other elections are rigged.
Twenty six constituencies in Crimea and Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts were under occupation by Russia or its separatist allies and unable to participate. Of the remaining 199 130 voted in Zelenskyy’s ‘Servant of the People’ party.
Thank you for confirming my point.
After 2014, Putin actually encouraged Ukraine to join EU (but not NATO). The reason is simple: bringing Ukraine in will weaken the EU.
” If Putin does recognise Ukraine’s right to self-determination why the effort to steer it away from the EU ”
Because joining the EU would result in a huge loss of self-determination. In any case, Putin has never been against Ukraine joining the EU, only against joining NATO.
“and the invasion which was/is intended to disarm the country and replace the current government with one favourable to Russia”
The current one being the result of a coup which was intended and succeeding in replacing the democratically elected one with one favourable to and controlled by the US. In any case, it is not “one favourable to” but “one not hostile to”. That is a difference that even you can appreciate, I think.
“What was on the table would’ve effectively disarmed Ukraine..”
You’re talking bollocks as usual, “troop limitations” are not “disarmament”. Why did Ukraine need the largest army in Europe? If it needed it to oppose the Russian army then, to have any effect, it needed to be at least twice the size, as can be seen by it’s dismal performance ever since the invasion. It was completely useless as a deterrent, as history had already proved by the time of the negotiations.
Given the choice between a peace treaty that left Ukraine with a smaller army and kept it neutral and war which left Ukraine with half its former population, with the rest having fled or been killed, it’s economy on life support and the eastern half of the country lost to Russia, I would have chosen the former. You it appears, are happy with choosing the latter, but then, I suppose, that is because you don’t actually live in Ukraine and are not suffering any of the fallout.
Because joining the EU would result in a huge loss of self-determination. In any case, Putin has never been against Ukraine joining the EU,
If so then that would be Ukraine’s problem, nothing Russia need worry about. In 2014 Putin bribed the then Ukraine president Yanukovych to turn his back on an EU deal already voted through parliament in favour of Russia. It kicked off riots and saw Yanukovych voted out of office.
The performance of the Ukrainian armed services in the face of a larger and better equipped adversary has been anything but dismal. The treaty would’ve left it effectively defenceless and allowed Russia to occupy the entire country.
“In 2014 Putin bribed the then Ukraine president Yanukovych to turn his back on an EU deal already voted through parliament in favour of Russia.”
The EU offered a deal and Russia offered a better one, so you can just as well say that the EU bribed the then Ukraine president Yanukovych to turn his back on Russia.
“It kicked off riots and saw Yanukovych voted out of office.”
Yanukovich did not leave office after losing an election, so was not “voted out”, he fled after the US-inspired coup.
“The performance of the Ukrainian armed services in the face of a larger and better equipped adversary has been anything but dismal.”
So what you are saying is the Ukranian army did pretty well considering it was outnumbered and up against a better-equipped army, in which case, knowing that, why on earth did they decide to fight?
“The treaty would’ve left it effectively defenceless and allowed Russia to occupy the entire country.”
Russia was already in the country. Ukraine’s army had already proved itself firstly to be no deterrent against a Russian invasion and secondly, unable to defeat the Russian army. If the Ukranian army’s purpose was to defend the country against a Russian invasion, it had already proved itself useless, so why would a reduction in numbers make any difference? A weekend amateur football team playing Man United is going to lose and lose badly whether they have the full eleven men or only six. Under the terms of the treaty, the Russians would have withdrawn their army, so the idea of the treaty “leaving Ukraine defenceless” is nonsensical.
In any case, so what if it did? You may prefer a Ukraine riven by war with almost half a million dead and the country devastated, but not controlled by Russia, to one under Russia’s sphere of influence, but at peace with no death and destruction, but that’s because you are not Ukrainian and none of your family either have or are going to end up dead.
The point is that Ukrainian parliament had already voted for and approved the EU deal, Yanukovych took it upon himself to ignore that and accept Putin’s bribe. How would you feel if Starmer had gone against a parliamentary vote in favour of a deal with a foreign power already considered to be hostile by much of the population? It was unconstitutional and illegal and he was rightly voted out of office by the Rada.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26304842
under Russia’s sphere of influence, but at peace with no death and destruction
Maybe that’s what you’d do if a hostile army invaded your country, drop your pants and bend over, most people have more backbone. I take it you’d urge Iran to surrender to American aggression and for the people of Gaza and Lebanon to lay down their arms and submit to Israeli occupation for the same reasons.
@ Bayard
‘……..because you are not Ukrainian and none of your family either have or are going to end up dead.’
Yes, B, THIS is the main point of this – and any other conflict/war, ie what do armchair warriors stand to lose/suffer by their sidelines cheering-on of other people’s horrible death and – if * lucky * – survival with life-altering injury?
Nothing, zero, SFA, yet, always we see/hear them baying for more blood, more suffering, more human, ecological, architectural destruction: they can never get enough of that stuff; just as long as they are 100/1000s of miles distant from the front lines of horror.
It’s a matter of record. eg confirmed by wholesome ” well thought of ” protagonists like Merkel that the entire Minsk so-called * Agreement * was never anything but a time-buying exercise, the bought time to be used to build-up the Ukrainian Military to what it did in fact become….the largest, best equipped, * trained * army in Europe – remember THAT quaint little no-consequence ( in )continent, the one lovely peaceniks like the harpy Nuland so casually dismissed by the simple statement ….” fuck Europe ” ? and, lo, Europe has been duly fucked, albeit with the willing participation of soulless automatons like Starmer, Merz, Ina Rutte and Le Petit ( bourgeois ) Napoleon et al; every one of them loathed by their electorates ( other than Rutte, who was never elected by the public, but promoted purely for ideological compliance with * vested interests ): every one of them needing the Proxy War to continue it’s bloodsoaked course. When it ends, so do they, politically, anyway
In tandem with the build-up of the Ukrainian Military was the promoting of ferbrile Ethnic Nationalism ( what, you thought those several CIA units operating in Tellytubbyland East were there to promote harmonious relations with that country’s neighbour/s? LOL ) and virulent Russophobia, more accurately, visceral hatred of Russia and it’s people, manifesting in constant attrition against the Russian-speaking areas of that country. Well done, all concerned, the death toll for what you instigated will earn you the lasting admiration of Thanatos and his infernal legions for ever: or at least until the next episode of human misery creation – manufacturing.
All this is known; but, still, the screeching peripheral banshees wail their discordant counterpoint to the songs of death.
Cheerleaders of other people’s pain; they deserve nothing but the deepest contempt
It’s not a matter of urging Ukraine to resist an illegal occupation but supporting them for as long as they’re prepared to fight.
Once again would you offer this same advice to the people of Iran, Lebanon and Gaza? I don’t see any calls for Russia to stop the killing either and despite what you want to think it was they who started this war, they who crossed the border. Come to think of it wouldn’t Scotland be better off it just accepted English rule instead of trying to resist?
Most countries in Europe endured occupation by the Nazis or Soviets, sometimes both, it’s still in the folk memory. People’s who were spared that don’t fully understand the loss of sovereignty and freedom, the oppression, theft, looting, disappearances, rape, torture and murder. All of which have already been reported from occupied areas of Ukraine.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukrainian-civilians-suffer-systematic-torture-russian-facilities-un-says-2025-09-23/
https://www.hrw.org/the-day-in-human-rights/2025/05/06
Now how are we going to deal with that? They were ‘Ukanazis’ and deserved it? Ukraine does the same? Dismiss the sources or simply a blanket denial?
“It’s not a matter of urging Ukraine to resist an illegal occupation but supporting them for as long as they’re prepared to fight.”
That’s just a different way of saying:- ” I and my fellow members of the ‘101st Chairborne’ are willing to fight to the last Ukrainian”
@ Migraine
Laughable how you insist on trying to back up your – in actuality unprovable – claims of Russian barbarity via links to sources that I wouldn’t trust to tell me the correct time of day. I could no doubt do the same in reverse, ie find and post links claiming similar behaviour by Ukrainians against Russians; but I don’t, for the same reason. Unless one can verify such claims with ones own eyes, I consider such things unreliable
As Frank says, everything you say ( and who is this ” we ” you refer to ?) is just remixes of the same broken record played on the same old fucked-up stereo and comprising the same monotonous, mindlessly repetitive dirge… ” others should die that my sense of moral superiority be unchallenged “.
If I had ever thought that this conflict was remotely as the West’s narrative lies, ie” innocent, gentle Ukrainian lambs were gambolling disarmingly in their summer meadows when who should appear….oooo, please don’t say ” the R……. ” , yes, that’s right, those barbarous Orcs appeared out of nowhere and in an act of unprovoked savagery started massacring those poor defenceless lambs ” had even a grain of truth to it, I would not have been motivated to try to puncture that web of lies and see things from the Russian POV.
Countries, like individuals, can’t just do what they like, when they like, they have responsibilities. There was absolutely no need for Ukraine to aspire to become a NATO member – neither was there any great interest in that ambition from the mass of the Ukrainian people; that idea was always planted from * outside * with the sole aim of provoking a response from Russia: as stated previously…..Ukraine could have been the Switzerland of E.Europe, it’s Neutrality rewarded by a potential standard of living for it’s people as high as any of the ( former ) European Post War economic ‘ success stories ‘ eg the now crumbling former ” Economic Power-house of Europe ” ie Germany: but, no, that potential was sacrificed that U.S malevolence be satisfied by provoking Russia. Well, the bastards got a response, didn’t they? Tragically it’s the * ordinary * people on both sides who have paid the price, whilst human debris like Zelensky swan about the West like some kind of rock star on permanent tour. Fucking horrible little coked-up monkey.
What’s urgently needed there – as elsewhere – is people who understand the true cost of War and who value peace more, much more than pathetic power plays and the psychopathic desire to dominate others. None such anywhere in sight; at least none with any power to end bloody hostilities and replace hatred with understanding and dialogue/ diplomacy
Until such times as there are…..I have no reason to think otherwise than …..” Cheerleaders of other people’s pain; they deserve nothing but the deepest contempt “
Equally laughable is the knee jerk reaction to dismiss sources as unreliable, probably run by the CIA or MI5, until such time as they produce something critical about the US or Israel.
https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2026/country-chapters/israel-and-palestine
https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2026/03/un-expert-warns-torture-has-become-state-doctrine-israel-making-prisons
At which point they go back to being flavour of the month.
It’s quite clear that posters here calling for Ukraine to be forced into surrender aren’t really concerned about civilian casualties but are cheerleading for a Russian victory. I don’t see any of them volunteering to serve with the Russian army either. Once again where are the calls for Iran, Gaza and Lebanon to surrender?
“How would you feel if Starmer had gone against a parliamentary vote in favour of a deal with a foreign power already considered to be hostile by much of the population?”
I would expect that the effect in Britain would be more or less the same as it was in Ukraine: a small minority would protest, it would be headlines for a few days and then the vast majority would forget about, having never really cared one way or the other. The difference between Ukraine and Britain is that no-one is likely to bother to organise a colour revolution in Britain, not if they have any sense. The British don’t do revolutions.
In any case, you are confusing the executive with the legislature. Parliament (or the Rada) is simply the legislature, it just makes laws. It doesn’t actually run the country, that is the job of the executive, i.e. the President, their ministers and the civil service.
“It was unconstitutional and illegal and he was rightly voted out of office by the Rada.”
Chapter and verse of the Ukranian constitution, please. Being voted out of office by MPs is not democratic if you have been voted in by a general vote. If it was all so bad and wrong, why did Ukraine not hold a popular vote on the question? Could it have been because it might not returned the Right Answer?
“Maybe that’s what you’d do if a hostile army invaded your country, drop your pants and bend over, most people have more backbone.”
I think the words you were looking for were “some people have less sense”. If a hostile army invaded my country I would hope that the government would do whatever it took to persuade them to leave as quickly as possible. If that meant having a smaller army and remaining neutral, so much the better, more of the government’s tax take to spend on social programmes. I take it you would round to the nearest recruiting centre in the hope that the government would let you join up and put you in the field to get killed in a good cause. I am sure you would die happy despite the agony, knowing that you had “shown backbone” and hadn’t “dropped your pants”.
“I take it you’d urge Iran to surrender to American aggression and for the people of Gaza and Lebanon to lay down their arms and submit to Israeli occupation for the same reasons.”
The inhabitants of Gaza and Lebanon know that Israel is never going to withdraw their troops, they have the word of the Israeli government on that and I think this is one area where it’s reasonable to suppose they are speaking the truth.
As for Iran, the cases are not analogous: Russia wasn’t proposing to take all Ukraine’s natural resources as part of their peace deal, nor was it proposing to remove Ukraine’s government and replace it by one hand-picked by them, unlike the US after the 2014 coup.
Another way in which Iran and Ukraine differ is the number of civilian deaths in the opening stages. In the very first day of the attack on Iran, the US killed 333 civilians, half as much again as Russia killed in the first three years of their war with Ukraine, as you point out above. Indeed Kharkov was taken without a single death in the initial stages of the war.
Ukraine constitution.
https://ccu.gov.ua/sites/default/files/constitution_2019_eng.pdf
Enjoy.
If a hostile army invaded my country I would hope that the government would do whatever it took to persuade them to leave as quickly as possible.
You seriously believe that the Russians, or indeed any invader, having taken the country at gunpoint are going to politely turn around and leave? You’re either very naive or taking the wotsit. Cite me one occasion where this has happened. It most certainly was Russia’s intention to occupy the whole of Ukraine, how else could they have achieved the stated regime change and ‘de-militarisation’?
https://www.csis.org/analysis/russias-ill-fated-invasion-ukraine-lessons-modern-warfare
In 2024 alone 2,088 Ukrainian civilians were killed by Russia.
apparently the idea that this vessel had been in territorial waters (the Strait of Dover) was part of the case vs its captain: but the vessel was in international waters when it was seized
While it may be more expedient for the government of the United Kingdom, alongside those of the United States and/or other powerful countries, to maintain but selectively ignore existing international law guaranteeing “freedom of navigation” (much as they already do in the case of, e.g., the 1928 Kellogg-Briand Pact, the 1945 United Nations Charter, the 1948 Organization of American States Charter, and other agreements that prohibit warfare and violations of sovereignty), it is also not inconceivable that they might ultimately attempt to formally amend international law to create circumstantial exceptions to “freedom of navigation” that they can exploit which serve to render its universality meaningless as they have in other instances, even though customary international law concerning “freedom of navigation” predates even the modern post-1648 Westphalian order going back to at least the late medieval period (for instance, see the SCOTUS ruling in the “Paquete Habana” case from 1900).
For a comparable example illustrating how Wesphalian legal standards and norms have been complicated, see this excerpt from Michael Scharf’s article “ISIS Has Changed International Law,” published in The Conversation on Mar. 31, 2016, as quoted in my previous commentary as “sveltesvengali” on Disqus (https://disqus.com/home/discussion/mintpressnews/from_wmds_to_narco_states_how_the_us_sells_wars_the_intelligence_doesnt_support/#comment-6770618728):
“In my 2013 book, Customary International Law in Times of Fundamental Change, I speculated that events unfolding in Syria might bring about a radical change in international law. It turns out that they have. […] Since August 2014, the United States has carried out 20,000 bombing and cruise missile attacks against ISIS targets in Iraq and Syria. Iraq consented to the air strikes in its territory, but Syria didn’t. And Russia blocked the United Nations Security Council from authorizing force against ISIS in Syria. For two years, the United States was virtually alone in its efforts. Russia, China and even the United States’ staunchest ally, the United Kingdom, felt that the United States could not justify its bombings under existing international law. […] Even in the aftermath of […] 9/11, the use of force in self-defense against terrorists within another sovereign nation had not been viewed as lawful unless the terrorist organization was under the effective control of that nation. This is a position that had been repeatedly reaffirmed by the International Court of Justice. But the United States argued that such force can be legally justified where a governing authority is unable or unwilling to suppress the threat operating within its borders. […] That view was not initially accepted by Russia, China or even the United Kingdom. However, their position changed in the aftermath of the ISIS attacks on the Russian jetliner and on the Paris stadium and theater. This, in turn, led to the unanimous adoption of [UN Security Council Resolution 2249] calling on nations to use ‘all necessary measures’ to fight ISIS in Syria. […] While this new authority will certainly prove useful against ISIS [NOTE: not nearly as useful as simply ceasing covert support for the Islamic State and other jihadists like them as a shortsighted geostrategy would be], there is a likelihood that it will ultimately be used against a much broader group of threats. Such threats could include a variety of terrorist groups, as well as rebels, pirates or drug cartels. […] With so many potential targets in so many countries, one must ask whether the possibility of abuse will ultimately outweigh the benefits.”
The ‘plucky pensioners’ defying the Russian Navy story, obviously has a back story that hasn’t been fully revealed. But just the same as with the Salisbury ‘poisonings’, the public story doesn’t sound much like the truth.
https://labourheartlands.com/smyrtos-tanker-seizure-newtons-third-law-the-reaction-is-never-equal/
Free Speech Purist
June 18, 2026 at 15:44
“poor seamanship and a frightened crew”?
That would be the Russkiy warship then?
FFS.
A smidgen of good news.
“After more than 17 hours of deliberation, a jury at Birmingham crown court has failed to reach a verdict over whether four pro-Palestine activists committed criminal damage at an arms factory. Iain Evans, Hana-Yun Stevens, Frank Sherman, and Hisham Alkhamezi were each accused of criminal damage at a factory owned by Moog, a US aerospace firm, in Wolverhampton. … All of the four activists have been immediately released on bail.”
https://www.declassifieduk.org/jury-fails-to-convict-four-palestine-activists-accused-of-arms-firm-raid/
As you say, a small bit of good news.
I feel more optimistic about the appeal of the Filton Four, at least concerning their “terrorist connection” (since the jury weren’t asked to consider it), and the Wolverhampton defendants, than the appeal to the UKSC about the proscription of PA. The latter should still be tried, because of the possibility of appeal to the ECtHR, of course.
Might we hope that the jury had been paying attention to the events on June 12th and weren’t prepared to risk the possibility that a similar trick would be played by this Judge? (I am amazed the jury in Woolwich Crown Court were not aware of what might happen – it had been predicted – and were not also aware of their right to acquit as a matter of conscience.)
I’d suggest the majority of the masses don’t follow alternative media, therefore there is a fair chance that the average jury members are not aware of the tricks that the government and their apparatchiks will get up to.
An example, if you like, of the collusion between government, Judiciary and MSM. The UK fascist regime !
Jurors must ignore all external influences and base their deliberations purely on what’s been presented to them in court. People have gone to prison over this.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c77zvl0777mo
They can acquit according to their conscience regardless of what has been said in front of them or presented to them in court.
That was someone who went against the judge’s order and looked something up during the case, with forensic evidence that they’d done it. It’d be ridiculous and would make it impossible to find a jury if they couldn’t use their existing knowledge. To reduce to absurdity, knowing the English language for example. It’s really not going to be possible to draw a line in that morass and how could you know anyway short of subjecting the jurors to inquisition.
The pro-Israeli establishment won’t like it one little bit.
“HUNG JURY
The jury in the trial of the MOOG 4 in Birmingham has not convicted them on charges of “criminal damage”.
The outcome means it is likely that a retrial will take place. The four are accused of causing £1m damage to MOOG components set for use in war crimes”
https://nitter.poast.org/DefendOurJuries/status/2067641496778445235#m
When the death penalty was still in force in Britain, juries proved far less likely to convict, whether due to opposition to capital punishment in itself, or that evidence of guilt had to be overwhelming. One can but hope that juries in future trials concerning damage to Israel connected entities, adopt a similar approach. It ought now be pretty much impossible for future jury members not to be aware of judges raising the bar to terrorism penalties over and above merely damage.
These inhuman mega-sadistic monsters really are the scum of the Earth:
Detained Gaza doctor Hussam Abu Safia shows signs of torture, family says
Gaza hospital director appears in Israeli court shackled, as lawyer and family demand release, fearing for his life.
A prominent Palestinian doctor abducted by Israel in late 2024 and held in detention ever since has appeared by video link at an Israeli Supreme Court hearing in Jerusalem, with his family saying he shows signs of visible torture.
Dr Hussam Abu Safia, director of Kamal Adwan Hospital in northern Gaza, demanded his immediate release after months of imprisonment when he appeared on Wednesday. Footage showed him looking noticeably thinner in his face and around his abdomen.
Abu Safia has been held without charge, according to the Physicians for Human Rights Israel (PHRI), an Israeli rights group, for more than 500 days.
“Dr Hussam remains in solitary confinement in Nafha Prison. He appeared in court via screen, handcuffed and shackled, the court refused to remove the shackles,” his lawyer Abu Odeh told Al Jazeera….
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/6/11/detained-gaza-doctor-hussam-abu-safia-shows-signs-of-torture-family-says
(Al Jazeera – June 11th)
Criticism mounts as Israel extends detention of Gaza doctor
Wednesday, 17 Jun 2026
A decision by Israel’s top court to deny the release of a prominent Gaza doctor has been condemned as a “profound moral and legal failure”.
Dr Hussam Abu Safiya has been held without charge or trial since December 2024, when he was detained by the Israeli military while serving as the director of the Kamal Adwan Hospital in northern Gaza.
Yesterday, Israel’s Supreme Court rejected an appeal to release the 52-year-old, who is being held under the country’s controversial ‘Unlawful Combatants Law’.
The court based its decision on what were described as “confidential materials” that were not shared with Dr Abu Safiya or his lawyer, Nasser Odeh.
His ongoing detainment has been criticised by human rights campaigners and medics, including Irish vascular trauma surgeon Dr Morgan McMonagle, who has spent time working in Gaza.
He described the latest development to RTÉ News as “shameful” and “dehumanising”.
Dr Abu Safiya is among at least 14 doctors and dozens of other medical staff from Gaza who have been detained in Israel without charge for more than a year….
https://www.rte.ie/news/2026/0617/1578819-palestinian-doctor-detention/ (RTE)
I suppose there are worse examples you could arbitrarily impose a 200 mile exclusion zone and sink any ships approaching it and then not help any survives as with the Belgrano even when there was a proposed peace deal . I guess they might have been given a warning though . But then again Hitler or his officials did give Americans a warning about the Lusitania and America did get a bit annoyed about it’s sinking.
Churchill was a great help to Germany with the sinking of the Lusitania, like Pearl Harbour, some say the ends justify the means, and other BS.
The Lusitania’s hold was jam packed with weapons and ammo – I’m pretty sure the passengers didn’t know about that – it was a tragedy for the families of the passengers, a modern day version would be the Neo-Nazi’s in Ukraine storing and firing weapons from a civilian area, that is struck by Russia which the Neo-Nazi’s do regularly, as did the Zio-Monsters on Oct 7th with their Hannibal Directive.
The Lusitania’s hold was jam packed with weapons and ammo – I’m pretty sure the passengers didn’t know about that
Pretty sure the U Boat skipper didn’t know either, He first though he’d sighted a flotilla of destroyers. The idea he’d been deliberately sent out to ambush the liner is just a conspiracy theory.
He didn’t hang around to help survivors either.
The passengers on the Lusitania were sacrificed by Churchill to pull america into the war. It worked.
Pearl Harbour
Gulf of Tonkin
911
7th Oct 2023
Wave those false flags
Stevie Boy
Spot on with that.
Brian,
I doubt if Hitler gave the Americans any warning about the Lusitania – he was a mere corporal fighting on the Western Front in May 1915 so it would have been a tad difficult.
Hitler didn’t, Germany did. Full page adverts in new York Times, I believe !
My view of the piracy is that it is of a piece with the escalation against Russia. Quietly, as regards mainstream media reporting, strikes against Russia’s oil and gas terminals have consistently sustained their reach across the whole of Russia, launched from Ukraine. Following the recent shelling which damaged a monastery in Kiev a massive blitz of drones has targeted Moscow and St Petersburg. Thousands of drones have destroyed the port and oil storage depot and many have also hit residential areas in the nearby suburbs of Moscow.
‘They’ want to sacrifice ‘us’, it would seem, our peace, and our way of life, for Russia’s oil and gas, which seems likely to be easier to get than Iran’s. Trump was always only ‘in it for the money’, and made as much as the repeated price rises at the pumps were likely to deliver from the blocking of Hormuz. The piracy in our waters is our opening gambit. The twits in their yacht had their 15 minutes of fame and the warning shots were effective in encouraging them to adjust their course. Most Russian ships simply adjusted their courses to avoid the main thoroughfare and remove any likelihood of being boarded too close by.
Meanwhile Greater Israel’s incursion into Lebanon looks intended to test the ceasefire, and wreck it if possible. It will depend who is prepared to support the Hezbollah Government’s 60 day deadline for Israel to fully withdraw from Lebanon. Will Iran view the refusal as outside of US jurisdiction? Or will the US feel obliged to sacrifice NATO for Israel?
We are not impressed by the fruits of our democracies, which seem to have been hijacked by various billionaires who ought to be faced openly and honestly if the issues are to be addressed. Rule of Law and Justice need to be seen to be upheld
Alyson
June 19, 2026 at 14:50
“The twits in their yacht had their 15 minutes of fame and the warning shots were effective in encouraging them to adjust their course.”
One boat was sailing from England to France, bothering no-one. (Unless you have evidence to the contrary?)
The other used firearms against an unarmed civilian vessel.
The “twits” were the undisciplined and reckless Russkiy sailors, not the yacht sailors.
In case anyone is interested, a video interview with the “twits” by the English “Sun” comic.
https://youtu.be/g1G7Ps6A2CU?is=4KAeoCgFY6gQQMMZ
The Sun comments are mainly focused on the fact that the yacht skipper is a woman.. 😎😄
They should have left the twits sail their boat right into their heavily build metal Frigate, that would have shown them, yeh, what shite would the reduxed Sun readers had to endure then?
‘Russian warship rams yacht without warning’ blah blah.
“‘Russian warship rams yacht without warning’ blah blah.”
I expect the Russians knew exactly what the reaction would be in the British MSM, which is why they tried so hard to avoid a collision.
For all the Russians knew, the boat approaching them could have been remotely controlled and carrying a mine. They say they first tried radio, then flares but it only turned away after they fired the traditional shot across the bow. If it hadn’t, I expect they’d have fired to destroy it and remove any threat. Sounds like what any warship from any nation might do in this situation near hostile waters and there’s no obvious reason they would have done anything different then lied about it. All I can say is that the timing, in the middle of a crescendo of anti-Russian propaganda, was suspiciously convenient.
“One boat was sailing from England to France, bothering no-one.”
Sailing your boat straight at a large ship is not “bothering no-one”. Regardless of the nationality or purpose of the ship, no-one wants a collision at sea.
“The other used firearms against an unarmed civilian vessel.”
You really do have a short memory. To remind you: “Then a minute or so later they gave another five blasts on their horn, immediately followed by four to five small arms fire. That wasn’t aimed at us – it was warning fire that went up in the air, we believe.” or do you, in another country, know better than someone who was actually there. Please stop confusing what you’d like to have happened with what actually happened.
Bayard
June 20, 2026 at 14:34
What evidence is there that the 13 metre plastic boat was ” Sailing straight at a large ship “?
A (very) large ship made of steel….
The old fools most likely set their boat on auto pilot and took a nap.
Yuri K
June 21, 2026 at 00:20
No-one crosses the English Channel – one of the busiest shipping lanes in the world – on autopilot.
The “old fool” description of people about whom you know nothing is just projection.
On Oct 12, 2000 an unarmed civilian boat blew a hole in USS Cole, killing 17 sailors and injuring 40. One needs to be careful these days.
Re my 0.42 post on June 17th, I just checked out JVL and came across the following, posted on the 17th. This from JVLs introduction:
Stolen land sale – “The Greater Israel Real Estate Event”
We have already reported here that: “On Sunday, a London synagogue hosted “The Great Israeli Real Estate Event” and there were many objections, including concerns raised in Parliament that this included selling property in settlements, all of which are illegal under international law.”
It should have been called “The Greater Israel Real Estate Event”, as stolen lands were offered for sale.
Below we post some related social media posts, video proof of stolen lands being offered, a letter from Zack Polanski to Sadiq Khan, and the MPs letter of protest in which more than 101 British MPs and members of the House of Lords signed a joint letter to Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper protesting and demanding the cancellation of the event (it wasn’t).
But first we offer the Board of Deputies of British Jews statement which accepts uncritically the unambiguous – and false – assertion that “The event organisers have publicly refuted claims that the event is marketing real estate over the Green Line.”
We provide evidence to the contrary….
https://jewishvoiceforliberation.org.uk/article/stolen-land-auction/
I saved the following article (along with a few others about the episode) to read later, and just got round to reading this one last night, and it’s full of total B/S. In my previous post I mentioned – re the claim that Edgware is a ‘Jewish area’ – that you have to go through part of a council estate to get to the main entrance to the synagogue…. The ‘part’ I was referring to is in fact a road called Parnell Close, and the synagogue is at the end of it. Anyway, in the Jewish Weekly article I’m referring to (posted on June 14th) it said the following, under the sub-heading A Jewish Neighbourhood Targeted:
Edgware is not simply a geographic location. The streets around Broadhurst Avenue and Parnell Square are where thousands of Jewish families live, worship, shop and raise their children. Synagogues, kosher restaurants and Jewish communal buildings are woven into the fabric of this neighbourhood, and the area has long been one of the most visible centres of Jewish life in North West London….
There is no such place as Parnell Square near the synagogue, or in Edgware, or in fact the whole of the UK (the only Parnell Square I found is in Dublin!). Only Parnell Close, which leads down to the synagogue. And it’s a part of the council estate (as I related in my initial post), with blocks of flats on each side. This is a shot from near the end of the road, and you can just see the curved roof of the synagogue above the trees (to the immediate left is the British Legion club). And as I said in my initial post, there are around 400 properties on the council estate, and another one about a quarter mile away with a similar number of properties. And THAT’s just in the immediate area!:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.6228492,-0.2679954,3a,75y,275.27h,89.3t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1siOiV0Bw-LaJ2vA6kFHN7Uw!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fcb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26pitch%3D0.6971749334741162%26panoid%3DiOiV0Bw-LaJ2vA6kFHN7Uw%26yaw%3D275.2718550325842!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI2MDYxNi4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D
And in the other roads close to the synagogue, there are at least as many non-Jewish households as there are Jewish households, if not MORE (I know THAT for a fact because I used to have a window cleaning empire in the area (part time!) and, as such, cleaned lots of windows in the surrounding roads. In fact I’d say DEFINITELY more, although Broadhurst Avenue (on the opposite side from Parnell Close) is mainly Jewish households (but there’s only about fifty houses in the road). Yes, I’m mentioning council estates for the obvious reason that you are unlikely to find many Jewish people living on them, but given that the article (as with others) paints a picture of Edgware being a ‘Jewish area’, there is also ANOTHER council estate about three-quarters of a mile away from the synagogue with hundreds and hundreds of properties, including several ten-story blocks with four flats on each floor (I went to the secondary school there). Apologies for going into such detail, but their falseheads regards Edgware get RIGHT up my nose!
Oh, and I nearly forgot, the picture at the top of the article is not only NOT by the synagogue, it’s not even in Edgware (which I know like the back of my hand), and god knows where the fuck it is.
PS I just thought I’d quickly check exactly how many ten-story blocks there are on the council estate, and went on google map street view, and it has all changed beyond recognition, and the blocks are no longer there, and there are four story blocks everywhere, including on all the large grass areas there used to be!
It just this minute occurred to me that I didn’t put a link to The Jewish Weekly piece…of propaganda shite:
Edgware synagogue protest confrontation, 3 Big things UK Jew must know
https://thejewishweekly.com/edgware-synagogue-protest-confrontation/
I just checked out the other article (JVL reposted, a Declassified article)) re the event at the synagogue, posted on June 16th. Here’s the JVL introduction:
On Sunday, a London synagogue hosted “The Great Israeli Real Estate Event” and there were many objections, including concerns raised in Parliament that this included selling property in settlements, all of which are illegal under international law. Assurances were given to MPs that this would be checked out and assurances received from the organisers that only land within the Green Line would be marketed. These assurances were echoed by the Board of Deputies among others.
However, this was false and property was on offer in ‘Judea and Samaria’ (ie the West Bank) as well as occupied East Jerusalem as Sky News reported. Someone went in undercover and was, for example, told that they “had all the booklets and papers for it but couldn’t get them out because the police had said in order for the event to go ahead they couldn’t advertise properties illegal under international law” .
The Morning Star has also covered the protest against this “event” very well: Jews say No to sale of illegal settlements
Of course, the Jewish Establishment and the media will continue to paint those who demonstrated against the event as antisemites for picketing a synagogue. We say do not use a place of worship for illegal activities.
You can say that again! They NEVER miss an opportunity to smear Palestinian supporters…. by concocting and contriving falsehoods to do so.
https://jewishvoiceforliberation.org.uk/article/uk-synagogues-it-is-illegal-to-sell-land-under-occupation/
I was just checking out how news outlets covered the Edgware synagogue episode and, as such, spotted the following article on Jewish News, which is interesting for a whole variety of reasons, and this one in particular:
Labour peer Luciana Berger was among Jewish party figures to actively campaign for Burnham in the by-election, along with Courts Minister Sarah Sackman and Hendon MP David Pinto-Duschinsky.
I’ve not come across David Pinto-Duschinsky before (I assume he’s a relatively new MP), but I’m sure just about everyone who follows Craig has heard of Luciana Berger and Sarah Sackman, two people who played a leading roll in the A/S black op smear campaign against Jeremy Corbyn and the left, which was concocted and designed to sabotage his chances of winning a GE and, in effect, subvert democracy. And along with the MSM and Jewish newspapers and bunch of groups and organisations and individuals, they are traitors to the vast majority of the population of Britain.
Burnham promising ‘clear stance’ on Israel in aftermath of Makerfield by-election victory
Jewish News understands the Jewish Labour Movement have written to Burnham raising a number of concerns
By Lee Harpin June 19, 2026
https://www.jewishnews.co.uk/burnham-promising-clear-stance-on-israel-in-aftermath-of-makerfield-by-election-victory/
As I’ve said before, isn’t it strange that not a single one of these groups and organisations and individuals – who repeatedly accused Jeremy of A/S and being an antisemite – ever reported him to the police for hate speech/antisemitism. Hmm, I wonder why NOT.
Apologies for yet another post, but I just read the coverage by the Daily Express, and they don’t mention a dickybird about the event that was being held at the synagogue and, as such, the reason for the protest. Just totally unreal!
Angry protests erupt outside Edgware synagogue as police forced to wrestle activists
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/2217182/edgware-protests-synagogue-latest-updates-police
And check out the first six/seven comments, most of which are very hostile towards the pro-Palestinian protesters, and some of which have got many Likes. And then you get to one that relates the reason for the protest and, you guessed it, it gets lots of Dislikes (but quite a few replies from people who know the truth…. and who get a bunch of Dislikes too!).
PS I couldn’t find the Sky News article cited by JVL, which is rather weird.
Assuming Pandy Burnout gets slotted into the PM * role * after The Bastards That Are conclude that Gormless’s unpopularity is proving too, er….awkward re their main concern, ie putting the interests of Israel ahead of any other ( only DJ Zelly aka Gold Bogmaster comes close ), he will almost certainly be nothing other that the chosen Continuity of Agenda agent: the UK having become, just like it’s other master – Amurika – a Demockracy where only Zio-compliant ciphers are allowed to reach the top position/s. Northern Tweedledee replaces Southern Tweedledum and wraps his Zio-compliance in used fish n chip paper as opposed to Gormless’s fine vellum ( a gift from * close friend * Lord Ali Baba ).
Amusing to see the latest Labradoodle being shampooed, primped & festooned with pretty ” eh oop lads, I’m right wooorkin class, aint I ? ” ribbons; less amusing to see people falling for the fiction – again! I suppose people are desperate to believe that there remains the possibility that UK Politics/Society can produce a leader with genuine concern for the populace and the courage and conviction to do what’s necessary for the welfare of the country. No such possibility exists
There is not the slightest chance getting decent politics/politicians until the poison of Zionism & it’s current companion are eradicated, ie – Russophobic scare/warmongering to facilitate the dumbest idea ever promulgated ( and that is saying a lot ), ie Military Keynsianism – the major flaw in which is, again like Yankville , if you are fckn unhinged enough to try to create a Permanent War Economy, you will need, ipso facto, Permanent War- those hyper-expensive weapons won’t replace themselves, will they? like, DUH!
Of course the disseminators of such lunacy will be quite happy with that prospect because A) they imagine they’ll have shelter if it all goes supernova ballistic B) they can use the war – or even the imminence/ threat of same to impose – even more – drastic restrictions on what people can do, say or think C) they are already in the pockets of the MIC and will be handsomely rewarded for their services to Psycho Mammon when they leave office – if not before.
No need to be too worried though, all the little War Budgies on here and elsewhere will be 1st in line to offer their lives in service to * their * country, right?
Here’s an online video about Makerfield where Burnham campaigned. It mentions a big warehouse that an internet dealer might use, which is both an eyesore and weakens the prospects for smaller independent businesses (some shut down shop fronts are shown). So a smart move by an activist in a pub is to tell the lady in charge that Burnham intends to increase taxes on such warehouses, and lower them on local pubs (which are under threat).
Rishi Sunak reportedly advised Burnham to have a clear and doable plan from day 1, which sounds good; hopefully he will. Let’s see what happens next week.
It’s just a turd exchange, nothing will change, labour (and the rest) is the problem, not the glove puppets supposedly ‘in charge’.
Decent vox pop of what seems like a fair representation of the views of * ordinary * people, as well as a reflection of how/why mobs like Reform are gaining support. Being the Guardian it of course had to have a nice ” liberal ” * progressive * happy ending with views of nice, probably Guardian-reading, Immigration – supporting people: nothing wrong with such people – or such opinions, but it did seem somewhat contrived. It also made it fairly obvious why Burnham won so convincingly – ” Labour Heartland ” n’all.
We obviously can’t know how a Burnham-led Gov would * perform * but one massive bonus of him becoming PM would be not having to see or listen to that repellent creep Starmer, though it’s very likely he ( Gormless ) would still hang around the political scene and/or make occasional forays outside his fetid cave when he gets hungry for insects and bored hanging upside down for hours and feels the world just has to listen to his sage advice on, eg how to remove * stubborn * stains from around the crotch area of one’s breeks – or in his case – jodhpurs : just like that other putrid pipistrelle ( apologies to any bats reading this for the insulting comparison ) the equally repellent Blair.
Burnham was saying all the ‘ right ‘ things in that speech towards the end of the video: but they ALL do, when wanting something from the electorate, don’t they? Words are the cheapest product to manufacture and flog, but, as we’ve seen more and more these days, come with a FOGOF offer, ie Fuck Off Get 0 Free. They ALL promise the Earth then throw buckets of sewage in the public’s faces
The ‘ juries out ‘ until he, first, does actually become PM and what he does then; but apart from – maybe? – showing a bit more consideration and helping people’s everyday struggles with, eg ( un ) affordable domestic energy costs, rents, house-buying and rising costs of living generally, he seems to be sticking with the Euroclown Ukraine 1st ( well, until Israel barks ) idiocy and will he have the * bottle * to REALLY tackle, ie stop, the construction of those Enormodrome monstrosities like one shown in the video and eg MAKING Megacorps like Amazon pay their FAIR share of taxes? I very much doubt he does: in fact, like I said earlier, if there is any suspicion ( on the part of the Political/Military Establishment ) that he would do those types of things, eg end the flow of vast sums of money to the insatiable Zelensky Criminal Org, he will not get to become P.M. It’s axiomatic that certain pre-conditions will have to be satisfied before taking – being allowed to take – control of Government.
BTW is the presenter of that video the same John Harris that used to write for the N.M.E – a music paper I read every week with great enjoyment from circa ’73 to approx the Britpop Era. If so, he’ll always be well-regarded by me for , in particular, his love for and championing of the mighty Blue Nile ( IMO the best band Scotland has ever produced ) and the quality of his writing and musical tastes/judgement in general )
Is it not the United States controlling British politics? Israel are basically only a fellow puppet regime. No doubt the Americans are getting desperate because Brexit hasn’t been divisive/lucrative enough, so they are trying to see off yet another Prime Minister, like a failing football club blaming the manager. Meanwhile, the supposedly free and fearless British media stand by lamely, as if it’s all democratic.
Starmer oversaw one of the most aggressive assaults on British civil liberties in generations, all to protect Israel’s genocide and Britain’s participation in the crime of all crimes. That shows you very clearly who his puppeteers are, even if you won’t hear it said anywhere in MSM.
This genocide enabler shouldn’t be resigning. He should be in The Hague.
Burnham is no better. He is LFI and only poised to take power because a rabid zionist stood down to enable it.
As said many times, Israel could not and would not exist without American funding.
Israel was front and centre in the plot to depose Corbyn and install queer Starmer.
Starmer and most of his cabinet and party are avowed zionists.
Just join the dots, they don’t particularly hide their plans.
Genuine question.
Is Europe ( or parts of Europe) at risk of becoming a version of The Gulf States visa -vis Russia?
There seems to be a contradiction between supplying weaponry to Ukraine and assisting or taking part
as in firing directly into Russia by NATO forces.
Can big explosive drones fly 2k or are these missiles?
More to point missiles fired by whom from where?
UK provides drones and other arms to Ukraine;
UK provides targeting information to Ukraine;
UK Special forces operate in Ukraine.
As in Palestine, the UK is 100% complicit in the killing.
Apart from criminals, whores, STDs and rent boys, the UK gets nothing in return.
‘ Apart from criminals, whores, STDs and rent boys, the UK gets nothing in return.’
HA! indeed, Stevie, though I suppose it – UK – gets to imagine it’s still a BIG IMPORTANT *Playa * in global affairs, when, in reality, it’s merely a ridiculous, pipsqueak – ironically enough – rent boy for the Yanks and Zio-freak headcases,, frantically clinging-on to what it imagines is it’s Golden Age of Empiaaah, dear boy: upon which the sun never set and the emperors always shat.
Despite the image of super-intelligent super-heroes risking life n limb to defend * our * country that has been carefully constructed by/for entities like MI5/6, via the MSM and writers like Le Carre, Fleming, Greene, they’ve always struck me as more akin to Austin Powers than James Bond
More prosaically, it’s really just an elaborate grift for the Insecurity ( ours ) Services personnel, enabling them to command fabulously extravagant budgets for the club & very generous salaries for themselves and the SPADS, spivs, spongiforms n sexual deviants that comprise their number
That there is also an high quotient of psychopathy and extremely dangerous brinkmanship involved is also beyond doubt; not to mention the phenomena of the Career Soldier, whose daddy and/or grandpapa served in the Armed Forces and ” saw action ” in one or more of the many Anglo Wars of Empire Creation/Sustaining and which they themselves ( the present day Blimps ), never having saw much action beyond the Discotheques of Nicosea and the sleazy * girly * bars of Bangkok, feel represents a shameful lacuna in their own military lives, one which, they imagine, would be filled by presiding over the deaths of a few 1000s or 1,00,000s latter day * gooks * n coolies. I think these rather pathetic characters will have an influence on Brit Foreign Policy lethal buffoonery also
Missiles are taking out oil and gas nodes, bridges, and factories across Russia, but Ukraine is making big drones, armed with missiles, that were heard passing overhead in Moscow on their way to destroy the port area and oil depot. I’m not sure we want Ukrainian factories building these things here, any more than the Elbit and QinetiQ factories that good people are trying to sabotage already.
Profit is the motive. Peace and democratic accountability is our preference…
Alyson
June 21, 2026 at 20:12
Do you believe that Russia should continue to be supplied with weapons and troops by the DPRK and (allegedly) with materiel by China?
Or just that Ukraine should be denied the tools needed for its defence?
JK Redux
This is war and war is very nasty indeed.
Either way.
There is isn’t a contest as to which country/leader is the most deluded or ‘evil’ if you are religious.
Yes – the Russians have been hit back, no doubt about that but, if The Russians hit back harder
then similar to Iran/US/Israel and the Gulf States it seems that we are in dangerous period of escalation.
The Mid East is known – it has happened.
Whether Russia will fire missiles at some European countries is not known yet.
When it becomes known, that is when things may get out of hand and of course the European countries will say it is not fair.
Only proving that all is not fair in love and war – it’s a dirty business that requires a winning side and that depends on what you are prepared to do to win.
Every time in history it happend as if out of nowhere – one morning you wake up into a new world,: the building next to yours is burning, tv shows nothing, radio says ‘please don’t panic and go to the shelter ‘.
However gloomy or unreal it might seem to you, i promise, it looks exactly like this.
Rosemary knows my secret, perhaps it’s time to make everyone know – since the war started I returned to smoking.
Disclaimer: please maintain a healthy lifestyle.
I really try to smoke as few cigarettes a day as possible, still it’s hard to abandon smoking, when you wake up and see drones flying behind your window.
As a credoed optimist, I comfort myself by the thought, that my workshop is actually a shelter in a basement. 🙂 so I simply spend most of my time there.
This week bought a refrigerator, stored gin, vernouth, and ice, going to celebrate www3 with a martini.
If ww3 won’t happen, still I’ll have a martini 🙂
Win-win.
Stay safe ( as possible ), Tatyana. The ” Moronic Inferno ” may be going into full insanity, but there is still hope the people under the malevolent spell of fckn mentally sick * leaders * in, eg Germany, UK, France ( that Triumvirate of Total Tits ) & the Baltic EU Arse-kissers in particular may find the gumption to rise-up against the potential catastrophe they’re being led into, pumped-up by the hyenas of the MSM and a Political Caste that will be remembered as the most abject failure in History.
Robert Hughes
June 22, 2026 at 07:04
I’d put the leaders of Russia, Israel and the USA at the top of any list of ” fckn mentally sick * leaders”.
Of course you would. Anyway, I’ll ask again …what are you n yr Putinphobic pal – Coco Migraine – doing still wasting time on here, when you should be down at the Recruiting Office signing-up to fight the Russian Menace? Oh, wait, that’s right, you pair reckon you’ll be more useful * tools * waging attrition on those damn Ruskies from yr nice upholstered sofa, correct?
Give ’em hell kids, but mind don’t be up too late playing Cowboys n Indians, you have school tomorrow
” BANG BANG yr dead – no I’m not, I’m only wounded: no you ARE DEAD I shot you 3 times – I’m not I’m not I’m not na na nana na. You’re cheating, I’m telling Mum
Robert Hughes
June 22, 2026 at 12:56
You claim that the leaders of “Germany, UK, France & the Baltic EU ” are more ”fckn mentally sick” than those of Russia, Israel and the USA?
Good luck defending that position.
Steve Rosenberg (BBC) reviews this morning’s Russian press.
https://youtu.be/1dib2QrruB4?is=aVEshzo_0nhpXJ0n
Could ask why you and Bayard haven’t volunteered to fight for your beloved Putin alongside the rapists and murderers dragged out of Russian prisons. As well as North Koreans they’re now recruiting Africans. I imagine they’d welcome you with open arms. For the record I’m 73 and on medication, whilst I’m fitter than a lot of blokes I know who are ten years younger I have to recognise that I’d be a liability anywhere near the front line.
The real mystery is why you and your pals still idolise Saint Vlad and refuse to believe that he’s responsible for anything. He’s systematically suppressed any real opposition inside Russia and you can whine about how he was provoked by NATO/Ukanazis/EU/US/Israel/Atlantis as long as you like the real blame for this war lies with him as much as the US is responsible for the bloodshed and turmoil in Iraq and Iran.
@ Migraine
‘ The real mystery is why you and your pals still idolise Saint Vlad ……”.
See, the things is there is no need to be mystified, because I ( and I’m pretty sure Bayard ) don’t idolise Mr Putin – or anyone else for that matter: idolatry is for the religious, sect/cult members ( eg yourself n Jakey and fellow members of the Zelly Cult ) and * teenybopper * fans of Pop Stars and nothing I’ve ever said here or elsewhere indicates anything of the sort.
That I refuse to participate in the infantile projections of others hang-ups and wild distortions of reality onto Mr Putin/Russia just makes me someone not as susceptible to propaganda as you and your ilk. In short, I consider Mr Putin/ Russia neither enemies nor threats – though the latter could change if the EUK Idiotocracy persist with their constant provocations -even in that event, I still wouldn’t take any Russian response personally; mainly because I’m not 10 years old. So why should I have even the faintest inclination to sign-up to fight them?
So you’re 73, but if you were, say 23, you would have already enlisted, right? LOL, aye, sure. Imagine getting to the age of 73 and still not being able to understand when you’re being fed a constant diet of propagandised slop, and by people, ie a Government, whose dishonesty, bad faith and moral degeneracy should be apparent to anyone not completely dense or ideologically blinded
I feel more sorry for you than, eg anger at your – giving you the benefit of the doubt here – naivety and war/death-shilling
To quote a former POTUS….” “Older men declare war. But it is the youth that must fight and die,” . Indeed, likewise is it cheered-on from the sidelines by those who’ll never be near any Front Lines
Robert Hughes
June 22, 2026 at 15:56
You said that people in Europe are “being fed a constant diet of propagandised slop, and by people, ie a Government, whose dishonesty, bad faith and moral degeneracy should be apparent to anyone not completely dense or ideologically blinded”.
In your opinion, are the Russian people “being fed a constant diet of propagandised slop, and by people, ie a Government, whose dishonesty, bad faith and moral degeneracy should be apparent to anyone not completely dense or ideologically blinded”?
Or indeed the population of that trusty Russian ally, the DPRK?
@ JK Howling
No
Rubber Hose
June 22, 2026 at 16:57
Well now. If the mods allow misnaming ( JK Howling) I’ll call you Rubber Hose on a trial basis.
A vital piece of equipment for the Russian detention services I expect.
Your monosyllabic answer (no) means that you don’t believe that Russian people are “being fed a constant diet of propagandised slop, and by people, ie a Government, whose dishonesty, bad faith and moral degeneracy should be apparent to anyone not completely dense or ideologically blinded”.
Aye right…
Republicofscotland
June 22, 2026 at 17:11
The Ukrainian government is no more neo-nazi than the Russian regime.
Sure there are a tiny minority of ultra nationalists still knocking around in Ukraine. As there are in Russia.
A country fighting for its life doesn’t have the luxury of discarding men willing to serve.
Was Yevgeny Viktorovich Prigozhin a democrat?
Is Aleksandr Gelyevich Dugin a democrat?
First off I’m not going to respond to the puerile name calling, if that’s the best you can do it shows you’ve run out of serious arguments.
After seventy three years on this planet you get a good nose for what the real propaganda is, You have to. So it can be proved that Zelensky is not a “Neo-Nazi-Dictator”. His Servant of the People Party is a member of the pan-European alliance of liberal democrat parties along with the UK Lib-Dems. They’d hardly be rubbing shoulders with neo-Nazis.
https://www.aldeparty.eu/alde-member-parties
I appreciate that the above won’t change minds, it’s essential to believe everything bad about Ukraine to justify the war but you don’t have to be a rabid Nazi to realise how dangerous Putin is.
https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/russia-ukraine-war-jeremy-corbyn-right-putin-oligarchs
https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/politics/fact-check-no-politician-has-been-more-consistent-about-putin-than-corbyn-315752/
https://leftbloc.ie/the-dangerous-framing-of-a-putin-puppet/
Well I wouldn’t wish it on anyone, my mother told me what it was like living through ‘The Blitz’ on London which was as nothing compared to what was done to Leningrad and Dresden. You’ve had a taste of what the citizens of Kyiv have had to endure for the past four years but do you feel demoralised and ready to surrender? My guess is no.
Well, the little Neo-Nazi dictator should stop bombing his own citizens – and blaming it on Russia – of course Kiev has has years of experience in bombing and murdering civilians in the Donbas, its Neo-Nazi brigades bombed schools, churches, residential areas hospitals etc for eight years solid killing many Ukrainians in the process.
Republicofscotland
June 22, 2026 at 14:27
*Cough* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_Russian_apartment_bombings
JK redux
I didn’t say Putin was angel, he’s far from it, I was merely pointing out to Pears (as you pointed out to me) that the Neo-Nazi regime in Ukraine – has no truck with killing its own as well, and blaming others for it.
Incidentally, today the Neo-Nazi regime in Ukraine sent a large amount of drones to attack Russia, its no coincidence it happened on the same date that the WWII Nazi’s launched Operation Barbarossa – meanwhile Zelensky’s Polish allies have withdrawn their highest order – that they bestowed upon the little Neo-Nazi dictator – due his love affair with Nazism.
Sir Keir Starmer has announced his intention to resign as PM. The Labour Party will organise a replacement over the summer recess.
Break out the hotpot n bitter and let’s meet the new puppet/ muppet – same as the old puppet/muppet.
Soon to be Lord Gormless-Blur exits and Zionandy- Oasis enters. And not a fckn thing will change – for the better, anyway
Wes Streeting has now backed Starmer, so the transition from Starmer to Burnham should be a smooth one.
Aye, maybe that Kushneresque * Demon Seed * – Streeting’s close proximity to super-creep Mandelson is still too fresh in the public awareness and he reckons – no doubt correctly – that it will be fairly quickly memory-holed and he can make his move after the very probable/inevitable Burnham Burnout occurs
I’ve not heard what Big Ange plans are yet.
Questions
1. Who will Andy Burnham’s closest advisers be?
2. Is the plan to call a general election and hand over to Reform within a few months? (Best to keep a watch on whether the Sun and Daily Mail are calling for a general election and how loudly, and Elon Musk too – if he hasn’t already done so before I click to post this message – and whether the skinheads raise the white power flags again.)
3. Why is Dominic Cummings keeping quiet? That he hasn’t publicly opined that Burnham is a non-elite level dude, best characterised as a “non-player character” (even if he’s a fellow northerner), may be a case of the dog that hasn’t barked.
4. What role has been played in this coup by those who control Donald Trump and what’s their aim?
5. Will Burnham do a Kenny “let’s bomb Russia” Everett, with regard to “defence policy”?
re M.J. June 22, 2026 at 12:04
corr. ‘backed Starmer’ -> ‘backed Burnham’
Ha, you’re not going to tell me that this is a coincidence – the Zionist have the majority of the Westminster politicians in their pockets.
A debate on it – would be like the establishment talking to itself, and finding itself innocent in every aspect.
“Did you know that ‘israeli influence’ on British politics is to be debated in Parliament today?
This debate was triggered after a petition gathered more than 118,000 signatures.
How convenient it has been eclipsed by other news.”
There’s also Starmer and Big Social Media falling out with each other regarding the effect of the social media plague on children – a few days ago. (After hearing this, I told a friend that Starmer would probably be out of office within a week!)
I don’t particularly think this is the reason for his exit, but I do think he was throwing a few punches on his way down at those who stabbed him.
Will he get a chance to make a farewell speech in the Commons, or no?
“Starmer and Big Social Media falling out with each other “, that’s all part of the performance for the uninformed masses.
Palantir (ie. the IDF) controls all UK government data. Until they are kicked out along with Elbit and all the other fifth columnists the UK remains under ZOG. Burnham (LFI) will be a safe pair of hands for the traitors.
Agreed.
I take it back about his farewell speech. He is a complete and utter coward and unlikely to say anything critical of those who got him out. In his resignation speech today, the first concrete thing the b*stard praises himself for is “ripping out the poison of antisemitism” from the Labour party, i.e. smashing the chances of an anti-genocidal government on behalf of ZOG. The dustbin of history is too good for such a wretch.
The Jewish Chronicle are
hailing victorythanking Starmer for his service:https://www.thejc.com/news/politics/starmer-poison-antisemitism-labour-resignation-lu6o57d5
“Starmer hails ‘ripping out poison of antisemitism’ from Labour in resignation speech
The prime minister praised his wife, who is Jewish, as ‘a rock by my side through good times and bad’”
Gotta wonder when these bad times were. The exposure of Jimmy Savile and Peter Mandelson? The end to Julian Assange’s captivity?
He’s (Starmer) served his time as a puppet PM, the natives were getting restless – and Stramer’s appointers noticed that, so a like for like switch has been brought in via Burnham – just today on X the LFI congratulated Burnham on his appointment – I feel sorry for those poor b*stards who actually think Burnham will make any kind of headway in Number Ten.
If he makes it to Number 10, Burnham with his carefully managed wardrobe will do exactly what he is told.
LFI have congratulated him on his appointment to what?
Perhaps Burnham won’t make it to Number 10. It’s possible he was simply wielded so as to remove Starmer from that office and to get a Reform person elected as mayor of Manchester.
If he does make it to Number 10, “Camelot” won’t last more than a month or two.
Here’s the website with links for watching the debate in the Westminster parliament on pro-Israel influence on UK politics and democracy (which will be in under an hour), or reading the transcript afterwards
I watched it (so you don’t have to).
Summary:
The premise for the petition is anti-Semitic. Antisemitism is ancient, a disease, cite reference to Nazis, Golders Green, synagogue attacks, middle ages pogroms against jews. We must be ever vigilant. Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East. We must protect the Jewish community in Britain. All those donations are meaningless and definitely nothing to worry about.
Highlights:
“The best way to guarantee peace is to prepare for war so our opponents respect us.” from Richard Tice, (who else).
“reject conspiracy theory dressed up as political analysis” courtesy of Peter Prinsley
Most of the speakers are pro-Israel and spout some combination of the above.
Ayoub Khan tried to inject some sense at approx 29:35 into the video below along with one or two others Iqbal Mohamed and Shockat Adam. There were some other sensible interjections but not many.
You’ve heard it all ad nauseam over the last number of years.
https://www.youtube.com/live/wN-qenChUO8 Link to video if you can stomach it. Keep heavy throw-able objects out of reach.
I just finished watching – listening to – the debate about Israeli influence, and there is much I could say about it, but at least there were a few who spoke in support of the petition. And of the MPs that did so, one mentioned the Al Jazeera documentary AND the bit about taking down Alan Duncan, AND, needless to say, none of the MPs who spoke against the petition said a dickybird about it. But several or more of them did thank Starmer for ‘rooting out the poison’ of mostly false fake and contrived allegations of A/S.
We can be 1,000% certain that they all watched The Lobby series of documentaries, and 1,000% certain that they know damn well the ‘A/S Crisis’ was a black op smear/demonisation campaign against Jeremy Corbyn and the left, and was concocted and contrived to take Jeremy down – ie subvert democracy. And in their quest to take him down they didn’t give a flying fuck about causing worry and concern and consternation amongst many in the Jewish population. And how fucking totally EVIL is THAT! Just as with the marches/marchers during the past nearly three years.
And isn’t it ironic that just eight days before the debate today practically the whole of the MSM disseminated the false narrative about the protest at Edgware synagogue. As for the BoD, well they just took the word of the organisers of course and presumably didn’t bother to contact any of the MPs or peers who called for the event to be cancelled, and ask them why. Oh, right, as if the BoD believed they would call for it to be cancelled without a good reason. Anyway, because many of the MPs speaking against the petition today – even calling it antisemitic in nature – were members of LFI, I went on to LFI’s website, and the first thing that came up (on their home page) was a link to a piece entitled ‘Working towards a two state solution’, .and I couldn’t but wonder how long they’ve been working towards it, and what precisely their ‘work’ has consisted of. Needless to say it’s just complete B/S. But my reason for going on their website was to do a search re >israel gaza geonocide<, and the following is the page of results that came up:
https://www.lfi.org.uk/?post_types=&s=israel+gaza+genocide
And I just this minute spotted the following:
https://www.lfi.org.uk/fighting-anti-zionist-antisemitism/
As for the Starmerfuhrer resigning, well he knew of course that he didn't stand a chance in hell of winning any leadership election now that just about all the (remaining) members he duped with his Ten Pledges know that he was lying through his nazty fascist genocide-supporting rotten teeth.
I watched it, and noted that no-one mentioned Ilan Pappé’s historical work on the Zionist lobby in the UK and the ethnic cleansing of Palestine, nor the real reason why Israel should be singled out – it is a racist apartheid state that nevertheless claims to be exceptional in having the “most moral army in the world”, a disgusting claim when you consider both its indiscriminate genocide in Gaza, and the inhuman practices in their detention centres like Sde Teiman, speaking of which, Dr. Adnan Al-Bursh, tortured and murdered, should never be forgotten.
Israel is no more a democracy than apartheid South Africa. A state with the full rights of citizenship restricted to the ruling race, that treats Palestinians as slaves (in the West Bank) or as the Nazis treated Jews in Warsaw, especially after the uprising, is no democracy.
And just about everyone on the left (and the right!) knows what John Bercow said about Jeremy Corbyn and, needless to say, not a single one of the other dozens and dozens of Jewish MPs who have been in parliament during the 43 years he’s been an MP ever detected so much as a whiff either!
But the vast majority of people in the UK are oblivious of the fact because, guess what, YES!, the WHOLE of the MSM blanked it. Now I wonder why they did that!
The entry point to fascism is “moral inversion”, according to a wide consensus of scholars. It is the key indicator that a slide into fascism has occurred.
“Protest against injustice becomes more offensive than injustice” (Arendt) “Rules replace moral justice” (Adorno). When this change happens, you’re in fascism.
It’s so often the case that when you do a search for something you come across other related stuff you weren’t aware of. Here’s an example of what I mean…. a DM article posted on June 11th regarding what Peter Hitchens said:
Britain should scrap Trident and build its own version of Israel’s Iron Dome: Given our meddling in Ukraine, it’s only a matter of time before the Russians begin targeting European capitals, says PETER HITCHENS
Britain should scrap its ‘pointless’ Trident submarines and build its own version of Israel’s Iron Dome anti-missile system, Peter Hitchens has argued.
Speaking on the latest Alas Vine & Hitchens podcast, the longstanding Mail on Sunday columnist questioned the cost effectiveness of the UK’s nuclear deterrent.
Trident is due to expire in the 2040s, with the current fleet of Vanguard-class submarines set to be retired in the early 2030s.
The missiles onboard are good for an additional decade so they will be loaded on to a new fleet of Dreadnought subs that are currently under construction at Barrow-in-Furness at an estimated cost of £31billion.
The proposed cost of replacing Trident has been estimated at between £20billion and £34billion – although the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) has put the figure as high as £205bn.
Hitchens said: ‘An Iron Dome costs billions, but do you know how much Trident renewal costs?
‘I mean, if you pile up all the money in the country to a height the size of Everest, it wouldn’t pay for Trident renewal, which in any case won’t work, and in any case, it’s pointless. To me it’s a dead loss.’….
Hitchens believes that western powers are using the conflict in Ukraine to launch a proxy war against Russia – drastically increasing the risk of Russian attacks against European capitals. (my emphasis)
He said: ‘The Ukraine is being used, in my view, by the Western nations basically as a launch pad for using long-range missiles to destroy high-value targets, such as oil refineries, very deep in Russia, which I doubt very much whether Ukrainian intelligence even knows where they are, or could conceivably do this by itself.
‘And so you basically have a Western war being conducted against Russia without anybody declaring war or with any state of war existing. (my emphasis)
‘Now there is a point at which it’s possible the Russians will snap, and they will, they knowing perfectly well where all this is really coming from, they might start using their undoubted missile strength in against NATO capitals, including ours…..
https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15889483/Britain-scrap-Trident-Israel-Iron-Dome-Ukraine-Russia-PETER-HITCHENS.html
I was in fact doing a quick search to see if any of the MSM covered what Boris Johnson said about it being a proxy war. I was pretty certain that most of them didn’t (except for The Telegraph) and they didn’t for the obvious reason:
In an interview with the Daily Telegraph on Nov. 28, former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson argued that the only problem in Ukraine is that the West has not sufficiently escalated the conflict. RT reported that BoJo said:
“The problem has not been escalation; the problem has been the failure to escalate fast enough. It has been the dithering, the delay, and the nickel-and-diming of the [support] measures,” he said. “Let’s face it: We’re waging a proxy war but not giving our proxies the ability to do the job. For years now, we’ve been allowing them to fight with one hand tied behind their backs, and it has been cruel,” Johnson stated.
https://eir.news/2024/11/news/boris-johnson-lets-his-hair-down-admits-were-waging-a-proxy-war-against-russia/ (November 30th, 2024)
Afterthought: Needless to say, BJ said what he said in the Telegraph interview because he knew that the vast majority of Telegraph readers had figured THAT out long before.
As most of us on the left had of course.
I just did a search re >who initially said that ‘the west/nato is willing to fight russia to the last ukrainian’, or words to that effect<, a phrase that has oft been repeated on social media and left-wing/independent blogs, and this was the response from the Search Assist (I then enquired WHEN he said it):
The phrase “the West is willing to fight Russia to the last Ukrainian” is often attributed to Vladimir Putin, reflecting his perspective on Western support for Ukraine during the ongoing conflict. This statement underscores his belief that Western nations are using Ukraine as a proxy in their geopolitical struggle against Russia.
He said it on June 22, 2023, in remarks at a operational meeting with Russia’s Security Council.
Apologies, but I keep meaning to say that the Tory on Newsnight last night, Victoria Atkinson, (there were four guests) kept repeatedly banging on about the urgency of funding defence every chance she got. It’s on Iplayer, and the first time she bangs on about it (when she got a chance to speak) is at 6mins 50secs.
We really need to get the truth out there to the tens of millions (in the UK alone) who have been duped and deceived on a mammoth scale by these scumbags, before they have the UK completely militarised, and those they duped and deceived in full-on militarised mode – ie in war-footing mode.
Anyway, I just happened to spot this article from a year ago when I did a search re ‘war footing’:
13 terrifying warnings from Government report telling Brits to ‘actively prepare’ for war
A long-awaited Government report says the public in the UK must “actively prepare” for war on British soil – along with a string of chilling warnings.
The National Security Strategy, published yesterday afternoon, Tuesday, June, 24, highlights a string of fears as the Government gets on a war footing. Keir Starmer has pledged to bring security spending up to 5 per cent by 2035 as the country faces a number of growing threats….
WW2-style spirit needed
The document says: “The years ahead will test the United Kingdom… The direction it takes – and the decisions we take – will reverberate through the decades.
“We will need agility and courage to succeed, but we should be optimistic. We remain a resolute country, rich in history, values and in our capabilities. But most of all, there is the determination of the British people themselves. After all, we do not need to look too far into our history for an example of a whole-of-society effort, motivated by a collective will to keep each other safe.
“We can mobilise that spirit again and use it both for our national security and the rebuilding of our country.”….
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/politics/government/13-terrifying-warnings-from-government-report-telling-brits-to-actively-prepare-for-war/ar-AA1HnwwF
The fascist shit have been churning out such bollox on a regular basis since a few months after provoking Russia to invade Ukraine.
Tucker Carlson has been shining a light into some very dark places. His knowledgeable guests are saying the unsayable. Just as Tatyana tells us events happen without official acknowledgement or warning, Carlson is now saying out loud that Israel intends to destroy Europe. Brexit was ten years ago today.
We know that Ukraine was planned before the Maidan and I heard Victoria Nuland say: “Fuck Europe”. We know who the billionaires are, including the one that funded Zelensky’s TV character and his election. We know that Friends have captured our democracy and want to make – are making – lots of bloodthirsty weapons on our soil. None of this is openly debated, voted on, or addressed. No alternative trajectory appears to be on offer.
Global conspiracies are still being coordinated by the networks that were established by the broker who probably isn’t actually dead. His clients have much invested through his networks.
Is there an alternative or will it make no difference in the end whether we know what is coming? Will Burnham be for a different network of alliances? It seems unlikely but maybe he can still replicate some of the improvements he delivered for Manchester.
Much of the unexplained stuff that happens in top political circles in Britain is about “defence strategy”, or war preparation to give it a more accurate name.
Starmer’s supposed unpopularity among those who take part in pollsters’ surveys as opposed to the supposed charisma of the t-shirted man of the people from the north is almost irrelevant. Thatcher was as unpopular as hell among much of the population.
“The West is willing to fight Russia to the last Ukrainian” is true as far as it goes.
That the Ukrainian population has not opposed this war or risen up against Zelensky is as scary as hell, even in a country that since 1990 has voted for Princess Leia from Star Wars, Mr Punchy the Boxer, and a Yes Minister comedy actor. (Even the election of “You’re Fired” Donald Trump in the USA in 2016 and 2024 hasn’t led – yet – to large numbers of deaths in the country that elected him.) Then again, submission and blockheadedness have soared since the start of mass smartphone use and then Covid. Deaths in large numbers may be considered just a fact of life if the alternative is to put down the smartphones and start getting some brain cells. This thesis may well get some testing soon in many so-called “advanced” countries.
I wonder why Putin has not upped the scale of the Russian war effort and taken out the government district of Kiev with hypersonic missiles. That would surely force “the West”, i.e. ZOG-controlled USA plus its bumsniffers, to sh*t or get off the pot. If they get off the pot, it could end the war. True, it might upset China and also there is the question of Zionist influence in Russia itself.
Johnson, another fat clown talking big in the safe knowledge he will never have to be confronted with the risk of being literally blown apart, but is extremely keen that others – ideally and historically overwhelmingly the case, young Working Class men – are. A win/win scenario, Britannia gets to cos-play * military might * & global significance, rather than the pox-ridden old slag that it is, and the country is rid of a shitload of – potentially troublesome – lower class oiks: haw haw haw
And why? so that pathological narcissist c***z like him can continue raking in * gallons * of blood money by hawking his ” connections * to whatever groups of deranged misanthropes think they’ll benefit from such ” insider information “. He and his kind are among the most repulsive of wretches ever to walk the Earth. Bloodsucking cowards parasitically feasting on the lives of others: lives specimens like Johnson consider completely without value.
Yes, Allan, the degree of (unchallenged other than on sites like this) bordering-on-hallucinogenic in it’s * fantastic * unreality propaganda is truly breathtaking – and deeply concerning. And not a single UK Politician has uttered a word of dispute, or even questioned any part of the ” Russian Menace ” bollocks.
The EUK is behaving like someone who walked up to another and smashed them in the face with a plank of wood ( no, not Starmer ) and when the smashee responds in kind, crying ” look at those thugs carrying-out an unprovoked attack on us “.
This where the UK is at: a crumbling, totally dysfunctional/ discredited Political System/Elite whose response to ever-increasing public disgust at the dire situation/ them is to incite war with a nuclear-armed nation, squander £bs keeping the most corrupt regime in Europe afloat whilst, eg cutting the meagre Winter Fuel credits for OAPs and other vulnerable people, and now telling us there will ” have to be ” even greater cuts to things like Social Security safety-nets to fund the lunacy. It’s almost beyond belief that not only are they proposing these obscenities, such is the pathetic nature/ complicity of the so-called * Opposition * and the Political Caste generally, they will probably succeed in their outrageous intentions.
No fear, though, here comes Super Andy – Ukrainian flag in one hand Star of David in the other and * Post Politics * entry to Capitalist Valhalla all but guaranteed ( yeah, using one’s time as a politician to access big bucks afterwards is not at all political, is it? ) – ready and willing to…..eh……say stuff, promise other stuff and then……say even more stuff.
Expect much performative hand-wringing and faux-concern for * ordinary * peoples struggles – why, he may even demand the Energy Vampire Corps give consumers a massive 5p a year rebate ( * subject to eligibility criteria ). But nothing much else
It’s extremely eerie and sinister how ruling-class media is conspiring to erase the Gaza Genocide from all discussion of Starmer’s time as prime minister.
This is how his foreign policy is being framed for the ages by the fearless, adversarial, truth-to-power Guardian ..
‘Backing Ukraine, staying out of Iran and riding the Trump rollercoaster: how Starmer handled foreign affairs.
Analysts say foreign policy was an ‘area of relative strength’ for the prime minister.’
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/jun/22/how-tensions-with-trump-dominated-starmer-premiership
“Truth to power” is a laughable phrase and neither intellectuals nor journalists have been known for doing this much in any country, because it would risk their middle class privileges and lifestyles. Also why would anyone want to talk truth to the ruling scum?
They’re erasing the truth about Gaza because
a) the media are implicated themselves;
and
b) they consider the concerns of the left and ethnic minorities to be irrelevant and illegitimate.
Peter Murrell just got 5 years and 3 months for embezzlement. Lord Young said that it would have been 7 years, but he pleaded guilty and got a 25% reduction.
Meanwhile, i believe Sturgeon and Gove are to appear on a TV (TransVestite ?) game show.
When will the poison dwarf receive her come uppance ?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cq6188775g5o
Should we surrender now?
Maybe, when the entities that have been using/ protecting her decide she has served her purpose, namely….. derailing 1st the Scottish Independence momentum that had built-up during and continued doing so after the Referendum and subsequently more-or-less wrecking the Independence Movement by her advocacy and promotion of deeply divisive agendas like ” Gender ” Identity pish; passively accepting the Brexit result despite Scotland’s clear rejection of same – not even fighting for the same T & Cs N.Ireland was given; promising several times there would ” no ifs, buts or maybes ” another Ref during her tenure and * finally * ( I reckon she still has more damage to do ) presiding over and if not being DIRECTLY involved in her ‘ Stage Husband’s ‘ embezzlement crime, then definitely complicit in it’s cover-up. The very fact the COPFS/Police colluded in erasing most of the specifically women’s items from the list of things that Murrell bought with stolen monies and that the actual Police Chief at the time went in person to Holyrood forewarn her of impending * difficulties * should have been sufficient to make it obvious she was ‘ under protection ‘.
I reckon with things like you refer to above she is just trolling the Scottish people now – in particular the Independence supporting % :rubbing our faces in her * success * in getting away without so much as slap on the wrist for all the fuck-ups she has made, instigated or sanctioned – the most egregious of which is her centrality in the conspiracy to politically assassinate her former mentor and the man who enabled her to reach the highest position in the land – Alex Salmond.
Aye she appears to have gotten away with all that – so far. She may never be held to account, but the acid of her spite, malice and hubris may eventually destroy her from the inside, even if her protectors don’t do so from the outside
The BBC has just put out a documentary on Peter Murrell, available on iPlayer. It features Nicola Sturgeon.
I never watch anything on the BBC; except football if that’s the only channel showing any particular game. If it was down to me alone I would have binned in years ago, but my wife still watches stuff on it